Animal Testing or Animal Cruelty
Matthiessen and Lucaroni claims that “No responsible scientist wants to use animals or cause them unnecessary suffering if it can be avoided, and therefore scientists accept controls on the use of animals in research” (Animal Testing Towards Responsible Animal Research 104). Several scientists don’t have the right care for animals, instead of having them being free and happy and undisturbed among the earth, animals are being captured. Balls confirm that “Not only animals are being captured; these animals are being abused by many experiments scientists are creating. ” (Replacement of Animal Procedures Alternative in Research, Education and Testing 193). These experiments that these scientists are creating are going into different hair products, perfumes, and multiple cosmetics, human beings are using today which can be very dangerous for people.
This is a situation that is being allowed to happen because of the many failures in the economy. Animal welfare reforms offer less protection to animals because of the economics involved. Ball insists that “The economic benefits realized in animal use might trigger further abuse of animals” (Replacement of Animal Procedures Alternative in Research, Education and Testing 194). Killing animals is unnecessary, especially if it doesn’t help anything or anyone. Animals have the right to live freely just as we do. Wilkinson and Festing suggest that “Many of these scientists are harming humans, among the nation with their experiments that they’re tested on animals” (Animal Testing The Ethics of Animal Research 527). The product Lash Lure was tested on animals and the ingredients that caused problems with this product was called phenylenediamine.
The phenylenediamine caused horrible blisters, abscesses, and ulcers among several women’s faces and eyelids. Women that used Lash Lure resulted in blindness and to those women who developed ulcers, eventually ending up dealing and suffering from severe bacterial infections (E. g. I think that the government needs to be wiser in what they invest their money in. I believe that instead of giving these careless scientists money to take the lives away from an innocent creature, they should be spending the money on something that is more positive such as relieving the tax payments from our fellow American citizens. Instead, the government is just bringing the nation down into more debt and bringing hard-working Americans, down into more stress because of how much money is getting taken from their paychecks.
Douglas reasons that “If people really think of how much this experimentation really cost, they would then begin to realize that what the scientists and the government are really doing is unfair and ridiculous” (Ethics and Animal Numbers: Informal Analyses, Uncertain Sample Sizes, Inefficient Replications, and Type I Errors 448). Spending billions of dollars yearly on harming animals is just plain sad and disgusting, it is just a sickening disgrace and it definitely makes the government look evil and irresponsible. I also think that God gave every living thing in this world, a purpose to live life to the fullest until God calls us all home to rest peacefully in heaven. Until then animal testing and cruelty shall be stopped worldwide. Products can be tested in ways that do not include using animals.
Matthiessen and Lucaroni elaborates that “Using testing that does not involve animals’ results in more reliable testing, more cost-effective, and products that are more environmentally safe” (Animal Testing Towards Responsible Animal Research 105). Vitro testing is a method that uses human cells and tissues to perform tests or experiments that they would normally use animals for. Animals feel pain and it is very inhumane to put them through such pain when they are not able to defend themselves. Matthiessen and Lucaroni noted that “It is proven that animal testing is not reliable because humans do not react to things the same way animals do” (Animal Testing Towards Responsible Animal Research 107). A lot of times, these experiments would not help further any knowledge, but they want to see how certain things cause a reaction out of these animals.
These silly experiments are causing detrimental pain and suffering to these poor defenseless animals. Many people are misguided by the influences all around them and listen to those around them without gathering specific details and gaining more knowledge to form their own argument and mentality. Animal testing is more about curiosity and using animals as an enjoyment rather than for advancements in knowledge and health means that these animals go through such pain and even death for an unworthy cause. Matthiessen and Lucaroni noted that, “the advancement in Pathology has come a long way. ” These advancements have led to many cures and preventions to the diseases that have claimed millions of lives” (Animal Testing Towards Responsible Animal Research 104). With these innovations, millions of animals have been the primary test subjects in the clinical trials of the proposed new cure/vaccine.
Before any proposed pathological medicine is tested on humans, it experiments on animals. Ball confirms that “In 2001 only 31 percent of people under the age of 30 were against the practice, currently 54 percent are against it” (Replacement of Animal Procedures Alternative in Research, Education and Testing 195). Women tend to find animal testing morally inappropriate, while just under a third of men and a third of adults over 30 were opposed. Animals have their eyes burned out skin pulled off and all sorts of things. This is a situation that is being allowed to happen because of the many failures in the economy. Animal welfare reforms offer less protection to animals because of the economics involved. Animals in this world should have the freedom to live their life to the fullest just like human beings.
Animals shouldn’t be harmed or experimented on in any way, no matter, if it is just to test out cosmetics or different soaps and hair products animals should be undisturbed. On the other hand, humans shouldn’t be harmed either by-products that may be tested incorrectly on animals. Emily implies that “Wasting money is just wrong, especially when it is wasted on something so negative or on something that can cause someone or something’s life” (Animal Testing Animal Testing is Outdated and Fundamentally Flawed 97). Experimentation, in general, is too expensive alone and the government needs to get a wakeup call and realize that what they are doing, is wrong and it could be sinful. Animal, Vol. 28, March, 1994, Pp. Douglas.
From $10 to earn access
Only on Studyloop