Animal Testing is Animal Cruelty

Throughout the years, animal testing has played a critical part in new discoveries for human welfare. People tend to not understand, that the procedures and the types of techniques performed on these animals can lead to them dying. There are millions of animals being tortured and killed for these experiments. The procedures they go through, consists of unbearable amounts of pain. They are cruel, unreliable, and harmful to the animals. These creatures feel pain; however, if the roles were switched, people would not want to put themselves in that position. So, why treat these poor creatures any differently? Animal testing is wrong because not only are animals harmed, but also killed in the process of testing. There are different alternatives that can be used to save the lives of these animals.

For instance, testing began in the 1960r's, but a public outcry caused Congress to enact the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act in 1966, now known as the Animal Welfare Act (Lee 5). An Article written by Courtney G. Lee, The Animal Welfare Act at Fifty: Problems and Possibilities in Animal Testing Regulation,explains the origins of the Animal Welfare Act and what it intended to do. This act mainly focused on cats and dogs, but also tried to stop other research with different animals. Lee explains that, lawmakers enacted the Federal Animal Welfare Act (AWA) with the noble intentions of providing a fundamental groundwork of minimum protections for nonhuman animals used in various contexts such as laboratory testing ( Lee 1 ). Although, the welfare act was put into place, tests were still occurring on different animals such as guinea pigs, rabbits, and other non human primates (Lee 6). These animals were being used in research and held captive against their will. This goes under the category of abuse. Animal testing is something that goes unnoticed every day because humans gain benefits from it. These experiments occur, so there can be advancements in the medical field. Nonetheless, no product or medicine makes it adequate for these animals to go through these deadly procedures. Because humans are considered a dominant species, animals are seen as less. Soon enough, there is a possibility that there will not be any animals left to be tested on; therefore, scientists will then be forced to test these procedures on humans. Scientists can help decrease the amount of animals that are tested on by using different alternatives. These creatures feel emotion just like humans, yet we treat them so cruel.

In addition, the problem with animal cruelty is that it will not decrease until people are more aware of what is happening in labs. Their decisions are made for them because they cannot communicate their own choices and in result they are tortured with multiple tests. Animal testing keeps animals captive in cages and the drugs being tested on them can result in them dying. Keeping these animals captive means they are forced to suffer disease and injury for scientists to get results for human trials. Most animals do not survive the process or are severely injured. In the research of the American Anti- Vivisection Society, it explains the ethical problems that, scientists are mainly focused on preventing and finding cures for disease, but some biomedical researchers fail to recognize or appreciate that laboratory animals are not simply machines or black boxes that produce varieties of data (AAVS). The rate of animals being tested on has increased in recent years; in spite of this, the seminal book,Principles of Humane Experimental Technique", by William Russell and Rex Burch states the "3 r's": reduction, refinement and replacement use. With these three principles this book explains that," It encourages researchers to reduce the number of animals being used in experiments to the minimum considered necessary, refine or limit the pain and distress to which animals are exposed, and replace the use of animals to non- animal alternatives when possible (Russell 1)." Instead of keeping these poor animals captive, there are other alternatives such as stem cell and genetic testing or microdosing in which humans are given small doses of drugs to test the effects on the body.

Moreover, not only do we keep animals caged for experiments, but scientists perform harmful procedures on them for products and medicines which can have different effects on animals than to a human. Although, it is understandable why animals are used for experiments, in the article, Ethical and Scientific Considerations Regarding Animal Testing and Research, by Hope R. Ferdowsian and Nancy Beck states that,Recent estimates suggest that at least 100 million animals are used each year worldwide (Ferdowsian and Beck 3). They are used for trial vaccinations, also tested if cosmetic products are irritable to the skin, and many other experiments they are forced to go through. Certain drugs can help relieve the pain of a human, but be harmful to an animal. In the American Anti-Vivisection Society, this website explains the scientific problems that can occur when animals are tested with different variety of drugs such as, Acetaminophen, for example, is poisonous to cats, but is therapeutic in humans; penicillin is toxic in guinea pigs, but has been an invaluable tool in human medicine; morphine causes hyper-excitement in cats, but has a calming effect in human patients; and oral contraceptives prolong blood-clotting times in dogs, but increases a humanr's risk of developing blood clots (AAVS).

Researchers can continue their research, but with different non-human alternatives to test these simple drugs. This way these animals can still go on with their animal lives un- bothered and live the life they deserve. Many may think it is silly to think about it and that these animals have no emotion, but they do. Despite the fact that some may say that the alternatives to animal testing can be costly, there are different alternatives, ones that are not too costly. Labs will be cruelty free and the animals will be able to fulfill their lives as an animals. Anyone that is for animal testing is wrong and there is enough evidence stated to prove this argument is true. Again, the benefits of adopting these alternatives to animal testing, we will save millions of animals lives. If we do not, the consequences are that the poor animals will suffer. We can make this change occur by beginning to buy cruelty free products, make donations to organizations that are against animal testing, or leave your body to science. You can take action by going to this website: https://www.peta.org/action/easy-ways-help-animals-used-killed-experiments/ where they have written a letter for you already saying to ban animal testing.

Work Cited

1. https://aavs.org/animals-science/
2. Ferdowsian, Hope R., and Nancy Beck. Ethical and Scientific Considerations Regarding Animal Testing and Research. PLoS ONE, vol. 6, no. 9, Sept. 2011, pp. 1“4. EBSCOhost, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0024059.
3. Lee, Courtney G. The Animal Welfare Act at Fifty: Problems and Possibilities in Animal Testing Regulation. Nebraska Law Review, vol. 95, Jan. 2016, p. 194.
4. EBSCOhost, ezproxy.gwclib.nocccd.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edslex&AN=edslex2A05D54A&site=eds-live&scope=site.
5. Sherry, Clifford J. Animal Rights: A Reference Handbook, 2nd Edition?: A Reference Handbook, Second Edition. Vol. 2nd ed, ABC-CLIO, 2009.

Cite this page