An argument against the unethical and unreliable method of experimentation on animals animal testing

Animal Testing Is Bad Science: Point/Counterpoint

Researchers should be using more reliable test subjects instead. In today's day and age there is more non-human testing methods being developed.

Classes Cancelled

Thank you for accepting this debate. Perhaps most importantly, reproducing the preexisting conditions of stroke in animals proves just as difficult as reproducing stroke pathology and outcomes.

Is the use of sentient animals in basic research justifiable. The insulin that was used to treat the patients used to cause a lot of allergic reactions to the people who took the insulin. However, the human body works as one cohesive unit.

I am not discrediting these as methods of research; however, it goes back to my original statement that animal testing is the most effective method. Just because animals cannot verbally express their emotions and feelings doesn't mean they don't have any or feel pain.

Many cosmetic companies, for example, have sought better ways to test their products without the use of animal subjects. Thus their use eliminates much of the guesswork required when attempting to extrapolate physiological data from other species to humans.

Food and Drug Administration or the U.

What are some counter-arguments for animal testing?

Human organs grown in the lab, human organs on a chip, cognitive computing technologies, 3D printing of human living tissues, and the Human Toxome Project are examples of new human-based technologies that are garnering widespread enthusiasm. In order to reproduce the effects of atherosclerosis in animals, researchers clamp their blood vessels or artificially insert blood clots.

Risks are not morally transferable to those who do not choose to take them" qtd. Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine ; Two landmark studies involving thousands of menopausal women being treated with HRT were terminated early because of increased stroke and breast cancer risk.

The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation

And see Pippin J. The data showing the unreliability of animal experimentation and the resultant harms to humans and nonhumans undermine long-standing claims that animal experimentation is necessary to enhance human health and therefore ethically justified.

See note 35, Seok et al. Interactions with laboratory environment. Many are already available and could be saving lives. Others respond that animals themselves benefit from animal research.

However this is irrelevant, whatever happens with computers is the future, this does not deal with the concept of animal testing now. Therefore, animals should not be used in research or to test the safety of products.

Through animal testing, they are able to work out the kinks of the drugs, that way there is not a high human fatality rate when they enter the human trials. The NCI now uses human cancer cellstaken by biopsy during surgery, to perform first-stage testing for new anti-cancer drugs, sparing the 1 million mice the agency previously used annually and giving us all a much better shot at combating cancer.

Per aspirin as astra … Alternatives to Laboratory Animals ;37 Suppl 2: Unfair Treatment Animal testing has been a controversial topic for many years. Animal Data Is Not Reliable for Human Health Research (Op-Ed) dedicated to ending the use of animals in research, testing and science education.

argument against the use of animals for. Nonhuman animal (“animal”) experimentation is typically defended by arguments that it is reliable, that animals provide sufficiently good models of human biology and diseases to yield relevant information, and that, consequently, its use provides major human health benefits.

I demonstrate that a. Arguments against animal testing Animal experiments are cruel, unreliable, and even dangerous The harmful use of animals in experiments is not only cruel but also often ineffective. The postdoctoral project advances science, adds another argument against the use of animals for biomedical testing, and supports budding scientists committed to new and better research.

Arguments against testing The critics of animal testing base their argument on the grounds of morality, the necessity or the validity of this procedure, whether proper authority to perform such tests is granted, whether such tests are actually needed and whether such tests practically provide us with any useful information.

The supporters of animal rights say that animals have the right to. Nov 06,  · I am also against, but some legitimate counter-arguments are: 1.) The tests on animals are done to protect humans from bad products.

2.) The tests on animals are done to expedite the process of discovery for cures to human Resolved.

About Animal Testing An argument against the unethical and unreliable method of experimentation on animals animal testing
Rated 4/5 based on 38 review
Save the Animals: Stop Animal Testing