Debate Project
Con: Animal Testing
Table of Contents
Content
Introduction
Arguments
Opposing Arguments and
Responses
Legal Reference
Conclusions
Bibliography
Page Number
3
4-8
9-11
12
13
14-15
2
Introduction
When you look at these pictures how do you feel? I am sure that no one is
thinking that these images are justified under medical research. And I am certain
that no one is thinking that these pictures show the way that many companies test
cosmetics for safety. When you look at these images, as when I look at these images,
I am sure that you feel sadness, mercy, and compassion for the innocent animals
that are up on that screen. These animals are put through experiments day in and
day out until they eventually die alone. This inhumane horrible practice is called
animal testing and I am going to prove to you today why it is wrong.
3
Arguments
Argument One:
Results acquired by animal testing for medical research, are not applicable to
humans because not only do animals react differently to different drugs, vaccines
and experiments, they also act differently from one another.
Question: Animal testing for medical purposes has many flaws and is extremely
inaccurate, so how can you justify using animals for the purpose of research?
Examples:
Thalidomide (1960's-1970s):
 Thalidomide had safety tested on thousands of animals.
 It was marketed as a wonderful sedative for pregnant or breastfeeding
mothers and it supposedly caused no harm to either mother or child.
 Despite this "safety testing", at least 10,000 children whose mothers had
taken Thalidomide were born throughout the world with severe deformities.
Clioquinol:
 This drug, manufactured in Japan in the 1970s, was marketed as providing
safe relief from diarrhea.
 Not only did it not work in humans, it actually caused diarrhea.
 As a result of Clioquinol being administered to the public, some 30,000 cases
of blindness and/or paralysis and thousands of deaths occurred.
Cancer:
 According to former National Cancer Institute Director Dr. Richard Klausner,
“We have cured mice of cancer for decades, and it simply didn’t work in
humans.”
HIV/AIDS:
 At least 85 HIV/AIDS vaccines have been successful in nonhuman primate
studies, as of 2010, every one of nearly 200 preventive and therapeutic
vaccine trials has failed to demonstrate benefit to humans.
 In one case, an AIDS vaccine that was shown to be effective in monkeys failed
in human clinical trials because it did not prevent people from developing
AIDS, and some believe that it made them more susceptible to the disease.
Statistics:
 88% of stillbirths are due to drugs posed to be safe in animal testing.
 Ninety-two percent of drugs that have been tested on animals do not make it
through Phase 1 of human clinical trials.
More Examples: PCP is a sedative for chimps, Penicillin kills cats and guinea pigs
but has saved many human lives. Arsenic is not poisonous to rats, mice, or sheep.
Morphine is a sedative for humans but is a stimulant for cats, goats, and horses.
Digitalis while dangerously raising blood pressure in dogs continues to save
countless cardiac patients by lowering heart rate.
4
Argument Two:
In Canada law requires animal testing for medical purposes, however animals are
not required in cosmetic testing.
Question: Why is it right to continue a practice that is not required by law?
Examples:
Ninety-four percent of animal testing is done to determine the safety of cosmetics
and household products leaving only 6% for medical research.
Argument Three:
Animal cruelty is against the Criminal Code and animal testing is animal cruelty.
Question: Animal cruelty is punishable under the criminal code of Canada, and in
many ways animal testing is animals cruelty, so why so you think it should remain in
Canada?
Examples:
Section 445.1 of the Criminal Code:
Every one commits an offence who:
(a) Willfully causes or, being the owner, willfully permits to be caused unnecessary
pain, suffering or injury to an animal or a bird.
(c) Willfully, without reasonable excuse, administers a poisonous or an injurious
drug or substance to a domestic animal or bird or an animal or a bird wild by nature
that is kept in captivity or, being the owner of such an animal or a bird, willfully
permits a poisonous or an injurious drug or substance to be administered to it.
Section 446.1 of the Criminal Code:
(b) Being the owner or the person having the custody or control of a domestic
animal or a bird or an animal or a bird wild by nature that is in captivity, abandons it
in distress or willfully neglects or fails to provide suitable and adequate food,
water, shelter and care for it. Example: In New Jersey Beagles were left alone in a
building to die of starvation after testing was complete.
Argument Four:
Animals are kept in unnatural conditions (labs) and are exposed to stress, and many
factors that they would not experience in their natural habitat, making the tests
unreliable, as well as the fact that animals and humans get different illnesses.
Questions: Because of the unnatural conditions that the animals live in, on top of
the fact that animals and humans are not alike, animal testing is useless and
unreliable, so why should animal testing be used?
Examples:
1.16% of human illnesses are ever seen in animals.
5
Argument Five:
Animal testing causes the deaths of so many innocent animals. More than 100
million animals every year suffer and die because of cruel animal testing for various
purposes.
Question: So many animals are needlessly killed as a result of animal testing, so
why do you believe the senseless killings of innocent animals should continue?
Examples:
Canada
 2008: 2.27 million animals used in experiments
 2008: 98, 633 animals subjected to “severe pain near, at, or above the pain
tolerance threshold of anaesthetized conscious animals”
Argument Six:
Cherished taxpayer dollars are wasted on unreliable and cruel animal experiments
by the federal government and health charities. This money is wasted instead of
being used on promising clinical, in vitro and epidemiological studies that are
actually relevant to humans.
Question: Why do you believe precious taxpayers dollars and health charity dollars
should go towards the cruel and unreliable practice of animal testing?
Argument Seven:
There are 450 methods that can be used for experimentation, to replace animal
testing known at this time.
Question: With so many more reliable tests available, other than animal testing,
why do you believe animal testing is justified?
Examples:
 Epidemiological studies: The connection between someone’s lifestyle –
including factors such as diet, habits, and occupation – and disease. These
studies help researchers connect cause-and-effect relationships between
lifestyle and disease without doing specific testing.
 Computer Models: Computer models can be used to imitate diseases and to
help scientists understand the way different substances can be used to treat
disease.
 Cell and Tissue Culture (In Vitro Testing): Samples of human cells and tissues
can be used in laboratories to test a substance in a certain type of cell or
tissue.
 Cell and tissue cultures can be grown outside of the living organism, creating
an artificial environment for toxicology testing.
Argument Eight:
The tests that are used on animals are unethical and extremely cruel.
Question: The tests that are used on the animals are unethical, so why you believe
that animal testing is necessary?
6
Examples:
The LD50 test:
 Is one of the worst tests that was developed in 1927 and is still in use today.
 Groups of animals are dosed with different amounts of a test substance in
order to determine the dose, which kills half of the animals. Animals are
often force-fed the substance.
 The LD50 test is known to use huge, unrealistic doses that are completely
unrelated to possible exposure levels as well as the fact that the amount of a
substance that will kill a mouse has no relevance to humans.
Draize Eye Test:
 Rabbits are immobilized in full-body restraints while a substance is dripped
or smeared into their eyes or onto their shaved skin.
 Rabbits often scream in pain and many break their necks trying to get free.
The Draize test has been proven in studies to "grossly over predicted the
effects that could be seen in the human eye, and does not reflect the eye
irritation hazard for man".
 Rabbits’ eyes are anatomically and physiologically different from and tend to
have stronger reactions to chemicals than humans’ eyes.
 A clinical skin patch test conducted on human volunteers has been shown to
produce skin-irritation data is better than rabbit testing.
Argument Nine:
Animal testing generally costs an enormous amount of money, as the animals must
be fed, housed, cared for and treated with drugs or other experimental substances,
as well the price of the animals themselves.
Question: Why do you feel it is necessary that such an expensive and useless
practice should still be used today?
Examples:
The billions of dollars spent on animal testing would be more effective, efficient and
humane if it was put to use in developing clinical and other methods for testing.
Argument Ten:
Moral contradictions: is it right to subject animals to cruel experiments on behalf of
humans?
Question: Do you not feel bad for all of the animals that are subjected to cruel
experiments in horrible conditions?
Examples:
In one case, baby mice had their legs chopped off so that experimenters could
observe whether they'd learn to groom themselves with their stumps. In another,
polar bears were submerged in a tank of crude oil and salt water to see if they'd live.
Argument Eleven:
Throughout history animals were not the only things that were tested on, but
humans were also used in horrible experiments. The experiments are wrong and
7
unethical on animals just as they were found to be wrong and unethical when they
were done on humans. Scientific research throughout history has been about prying
on the innocent and targeting the vulnerable.
Question:
We learn from our past and we have found that experimenting on humans is wrong
so why do we continue to prey on innocent animals?
Examples:
 American researchers denied African-American men syphilis treatment in order
to assess the disease’s natural progression
 Deliberately exposed students and minorities to toxic chemicals in order to
determine safe levels of exposure to pesticides
 Intentionally exposed thousands of unsuspecting civilians to lethal bacteria in
order to test biological warfare
 Despite no chance of success, transplanted nonhuman primate and pig organs
into children, as well as chronically ill and impoverished people.
8
Opposing Arguments
Argument One:
Animal testing is necessary in order to further medical research.
Response:
Results acquired by animal testing for medical research, are not applicable to
humans because not only do animals react differently to different drugs, vaccines
and experiments, they also act differently from one another. Animal testing cannot
accurately portray the influence a medical procedure will have on humans.
Argument Two:
Animal testing can help ensure the safety of newly developed drugs and vaccines.
Response:
Animal testing is flawed because animals and humans are different and react
differently to different medicines, vaccines and experiments. Therefore animal
testing in most cases does not help ensure the safety of new drugs but sometimes
puts drugs on the market that are safe in animals but not for humans.
Examples:
Thalidomide (1960's-1970s):
 Thalidomide had safety tested on thousands of animals.
 It was marketed as a wonderful sedative for pregnant or breastfeeding
mothers and it supposedly caused no harm to either mother or child.
 Despite this "safety testing", at least 10,000 children whose mothers had
taken Thalidomide were born throughout the world with severe deformities.
Clioquinol:
 This drug, manufactured in Japan in the 1970s, was marketed as providing
safe relief from diarrhea.
 Not only did it not work in humans, it actually caused diarrhea.
 As a result of Clioquinol being administered to the public, some 30,000 cases
of blindness and/or paralysis and thousands of deaths occurred.
Argument Three:
Animal research is morally justifiable provided animal welfare remains a high
priority and alternatives are used when available.
Response:
In most cases animal experimenters do not treat animals well and most of the tests
that are completed on animals are extremely cruel and unethical. If it was true that
alternatives were used when available than animal testing would be obsolete
because there are 450 methods that can be used to replace animal testing.
9
Argument Four:
Animals do not experience pain and emotion in the same way that we do because
they lack language and the power of thought.
Response:
Animals and humans share similar mechanisms of pain detection, have similar areas
of the brain involved in processing pain and show similar pain behaviors.
Also an animal’s life and a humans life should be considered equal, an animal’s pain
should not be undermined just because they cannot express their pain in words.
Animals respond to pain by changing their behavior similar to humans, by eating
less food or emitting distress calls, animals respond to when they are put into an
uncomfortable situation and they are in pain, proving that they can feel pain.
Research has provided evidence that monkeys, dogs, cats and birds can show signs
of emotional pain and display behaviors associated with depression during painful
experience, not only can animals feel physical pain but also emotional pain that
comes from loneliness, or stress in a laboratory.
Argument Five:
Any differences between animal and human biology are generally known, and can
be factored in to experiments.
Response:
The stress and discomfort that an animal feels in captivity cannot be factored into an
experiment and this can still make the tests unreliable. There are so many
differences between animals and people that it is impossible to factor them all into
an experiment, and it would just be better to use alternatives rather than worry
about the difference between animals and humans.
Argument Six:
Not testing new pharmaceutical and cosmetic products on animals is highly
dangerous.
Response:
Animals are not the same as humans are faulty substitutes for them. As well as the
fact that some things that may cause no harm to animas could cause harm to
animals, and vice versa. This is why testing on animals can be dangerous not the
other way around.
Argument Seven:
Moral rights and principles of justice for humans apply only to humans and not to
animals; human welfare should come before animal welfare.
Response:
Killing and experimenting on animals should be morally the same as hurting
humans. And there are laws that protect animals in the criminal code, so obviously
the justice system recognizes that animals need to be protected under the law.
10
Animals should have the right to live their lives peacefully and should not have to be
brutally tested on just because people can.
Argument Eight:
Animal testing has the ability to not only save the lives of humans but also the lives
of animals.
Response:
It is not acceptable to test humans without their consent, so why is it acceptable to
test animals when they cannot give their consent. It is still unethical to test on
animals for the purpose of helping other animals, the tests still cause animals pain
and are still unreliable because every animal is different.
Argument Nine:
Human beings share about 99% of their genes with chimpanzees and a little less
with other types of monkeys.
Response:
Monkeys and chimpanzees do not have identical immune systems to humans, and
may not respond to drugs or vaccines in the same way. Not to mention that most
experiments that are conducted are conducted on rats and mice and animals that
are even more different than humans.
Argument Ten:
There are no reliable alternatives to animal testing.
Response:
Animal testing itself is not reliable and is unethical, and many alternatives to animal
testing have been developed that are faster and less expensive than animal testing.
As well as the fact that alternative methods are designed based on humans and are
more reliable and efficient.
Alternative techniques are typically far more sophisticated and specific than
traditional approaches to testing in whole animals, and many in vitro tests are
capable of producing information about the biological effects of a test compound
that are as accurate and in some cases more accurate information collected from
studies in whole animals.
Argument Eleven:
Mice and rats, the animals that make up a majority of the tests done in animal
testing laboratories are useless, so who cares if they get used in animal testing?
Response:
Mice and rats are affectionate animals that form life long relationships, are clever
and resourceful and giggle when they are having fun. Mice and rats are also good
mothers and will risk their own lives for their young and friends. Over 95% of
animals used in animal testing are rats and mice and when put into cages they get
lonely, sad and endure some of the worst experiments that are done in these labs. So
who cares about the mice and rats, I care!
11
Legal Reference:
Argument Three:
Animal cruelty is against the Criminal Code and animal testing is animal cruelty.
Question: Animal cruelty is punishable under the criminal code of Canada, and in
many ways animal testing is animals cruelty, so why so you think it should remain in
Canada?
Examples:
Section 445.1 of the Criminal Code:
Every one commits an offence who:
(a) Willfully causes or, being the owner, willfully permits to be caused unnecessary
pain, suffering or injury to an animal or a bird.
(c) Willfully, without reasonable excuse, administers a poisonous or an injurious
drug or substance to a domestic animal or bird or an animal or a bird wild by nature
that is kept in captivity or, being the owner of such an animal or a bird, willfully
permits a poisonous or an injurious drug or substance to be administered to it.
Section 446.1 of the Criminal Code:
(b) Being the owner or the person having the custody or control of a domestic
animal or a bird or an animal or a bird wild by nature that is in captivity, abandons it
in distress or willfully neglects or fails to provide suitable and adequate food,
water, shelter and care for it. Example: In New Jersey Beagles were left alone in a
building to die of starvation after testing was complete.
In this argument I referenced the Criminal Code of Canada, which is an
extremely important legal document that dictates the behavior that is punishable by
law in Canada. Animal cruelty is in fact a criminal act and is illegal in Canada. The
point of this argument was to show that animal cruelty is against the Criminal Code,
so why is animal testing, which is very much animal cruelty still allowed? Canada
should not allow practices that harm animals in the name of faulty medical research
and cosmetic testing, because an unreliable test is not a reasonable excuse to abuse
and kill animals.
12
Conclusion
Cruel, unreliable, inhumane, horrible, unnecessary, waste of time and waste
of money, all of these things describe animal testing. Animal testing does not work
in medical or cosmetic research because results from animal tests cannot be
accurately applied to humans. Not only that, animal testing is costly, cruel and
morally unjustifiable. Animals feel pain, get lonely and suffer just as humans do, so
why do we continually use them for unreliable tests? Animal testing is a horrible
and barbaric practice that should not continue in Canada or anywhere else in the
world.
13
Bibliography
Anderegg, Christopher, Kathy Archibald, Jarrod Bailey, Murry J. Cohen, Stephen R.
Kaufman, and John J. Pippin. "A Critical Look at Animal Experimentation." Medical
Research Modernization Committee. 2006. Web. 05 July 2011.
<http://www.mrmcmed.org/Critical_Look.pdf>.
Andre, Claire, and Manuel Velasquez. "Animal Testing and Ethics." Santa Clara
University - Welcome. Web. 05 Dec. 2011.
<http://ww.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v1n3/cures.html>.
Murnaghan, Ian. "Using Animals for Testing: Pros Versus Cons - About Animal
Testing." Informed Discussion on Animal Welfare in Animal Testing at About Animal
Testing (UK). 1 July 2011. Web. 05 Dec. 2011.
<http://www.aboutanimaltesting.co.uk/using-animals-testing-pros-versuscons.html>.
Peta. "Alternatives: Testing Without Torture | PETA.org." People for the Ethical
Treatment of Animals (PETA): The Animal Rights Organization | PETA.org. Web. 05
Dec. 2011. <http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-forexperimentation/alternatives-testing-without-torture.aspx>.
Peta. "Animals Used for Experimentation | PETA.org." People for the Ethical
Treatment of Animals (PETA): The Animal Rights Organization | PETA.org. Web. 05
Dec. 2011. <http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-forexperimentation/default2.aspx>.
Peta. "Animal Experiments: Overview | PETA.org." People for the Ethical Treatment
of Animals (PETA): The Animal Rights Organization | PETA.org. Web. 05 Dec. 2011.
<http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/animalexperiments-overview.aspx>.
Peta. "Government-Required Animal Testing: Overview | PETA.org." People for the
Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA): The Animal Rights Organization | PETA.org.
Web. 05 Dec. 2011. <http://www.peta.org/issues/Animals-Used-forExperimentation/government-required-animal-testing-overview.aspx>.
Pharmboy, Abel. "I Am Pro-Test: Responsible Animal Testing Improves Lives of
Humans, Pets : Terra Sigillata." ScienceBlogs. 8 Apr. 2010d. Web. 05 Dec. 2011.
<http://scienceblogs.com/terrasig/2010/04/i_am_pro-test_responsible_anim.php>.
Sneddon, Lynne U. "Can Animals Feel Pain?" The Wellcome Trust. Web. 05 Dec.
2011. <http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/en/pain/microsite/culture2.html>.
14
"Alternatives to Animal Testing." SHAC Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty. Web. 05
Dec. 2011. <http://www.shac.net/science/alternatives.html>.
"Animal Testing." Go Green, Live Green | AboutMyPlanet.com. 2011. Web. 05 Dec.
2011. <http://www.aboutmyplanet.com/science-technology/animal-testing/>.
"Animal Testing Pros And Cons." Environmental Laws. 2011. Web. 05 Dec. 2011.
<http://environmental.laws.com/environmental-law/animal-laws/animaltesting/animal-testing-pros-and-cons/animal-testing-pros-and-cons>.
"Animal Testing: Pros and Cons : Mann Erudite – Essays on Literary Works." Mann
Erudite - Essays on Literary Works. Web. 05 Dec. 2011.
<http://www.mannmuseum.com/animal-testing-pros-and-cons/2/>.
"BC SPCA: Criminal Code of Canada - Animal Cruelty." BC SPCA: Adopt a Dog or Cat |
Pet Adoption, Care & Behaviour | Animal Rescue | Advocacy. Web. 05 Dec. 2011.
<http://www.spca.bc.ca/cruelty/legislation/criminal-code-of-canadaanimals.html>.
"CFHS | Cosmetic Testing." CFHS - The Canadian Federation of Humane Societies.
Web. 05 Dec. 2011. <http://cfhs.ca/research/cosmetic_testing/>.
"P&G KILLS." Procter & Gamble's Cruel Animal Tests. Web. 05 Dec. 2011.
<http://www.pandgkills.com/main.html>.
"Scientific Argument Against Animal Testing." No More White Coat Welfare. Web. 05
Dec. 2011. <http://whitecoatwelfare.org/aat-text.shtml>.
"Scientific Alternatives to Animal Testing - Advocacy For Animals." Advocacy For
Animals. 17 Sept. 2007. Web. 05 Dec. 2011.
<http://advocacy.britannica.com/blog/advocacy/2007/09/scientific-alternativesto-animal-testing-a-progress-report/>.
"Why Are Tests Preformed on Animals." HIV Drugs, Vaccines and Animal Testing.
Web. 05 Dec. 2011. <http://www.avert.org/hiv-animal-testing.htm>.
15