They have feelings too

They have feelings too
By: Anoushka Sarkar 4th period
We often hear about large media movements towards the idea on whether animal testing is ethical or unethical, and largely based off the history of mankind we have developed greatly towards the idea of individual rights. Although, we seem to hover over the idea of rights when placed upon an individual animal’s perspective. Is it illogical and insane for a non human species to be treated as ourselves? Or is it merely the moral thing to do? This is how the controversial ethics of animal testing comes into play.

Beginning with the benefits of animal testing will hopefully further help you further comprehend the idea on why humans have been animal testing for centuries and the historical benefits that we have obtained from animal testing as a whole. Several life saving vaccines/cures have been mass produced by trial and error of animal testing such as the discovery as insulin which was crucial towards understanding diabetic issues through the trials of dogs. The polio vaccine which was also tested on several different types of animals eradicated polio from 350,000 cases in 1988 to an astounding 27 cases in 2016! Physiological and psychological studies were also gravely impacted through the use of rats, chimpanzees, and several other types of organisms. Unfortunately, these benefits come with a tragic loss towards helping ourselves, which is in the way we hurt these animals in the processes of these testing. 

Animal testing, which has eradicated many diseases, is not fully seen in the full picture behind the closed doors of labradories. Not simply for medical studies and advancement, but for beautifying cosmetics as well. Simple household items such as shampoos, cleansers, lotions and many more were heavily trailed through thousands of animals locked for months or merely years until their unforeseeable death. Unbelievably inhumane acts take place among animals in ways customers could never fathom. For example, force feeding, forced inhalation, burns and wounds from products and healing medications, physical restraint for days, prolonged hunger and thirst, carbon dioxide death, and trials in which they subject these large numbers of animals towards harmful chemicals which kill more than fifty percent of the ones tested. The commonly used lethal dose 50 test is imposed in which they sample hundreds of animals towards high dosages in order to sew at least a fifty percent death rate among the chemical product. This mortifying list goes on in ways in which the public is barely aware of the harm these animals are inflicted upon. Not just towards mice and rats as you might perceive but dozens of species including household pets as well. We often neglect the fact of this damage because it retrieves our own benefits and simply ignore the idea of their being other routes to take in order to obtain these results. 

    Animal testing, as it may often seem helpful, is in fact not a miracle towards the birth of deeveloping science. Animals are genetically similar but biologically different. Their systems, organs, tissues, and cells work in dramatically different ways than our own. Contrasting autonomies and different chemical make up allow for opposing tolerances that cannot represent a human population. Thus a trial of 500 rats tested for anesthesia cannot accurately represent human intolerances. For example, in the 1950s sleeping pill thalidomide, which heavily tested on animals before being released to the public, unfortunately correlated to the mass number of 10,000 cases surfaced with child deformities at birth from women using this pill. Similarly, animals trailed on the arthritis drug Vioxx which was proven tolerant towards the heart and lung organs was passed into local pharmacies, but eventually caused more than 27,000 cases of heart attacks from the use of Vioxx. These devastating effects are from the reasoning in which we biologically differ from animals that are being tested for human products. In what ways can we solve the inhumane abuse and death of these animals and prevent the drastic impacts from occurrences such as above? There are in fact multiple ways in which people have developed other testing methods that are indeed more accurate than animal testing. For instance, “in vitro”, which is studying the impacts of chemicals on human cells within a petri dish, creating much more accurate representations of our own bodies and their reactions to these products. A newly introduced method has been taken up by a few companies in which microchips which were grown with organs of humans in labs accurately respond to testing methods in ways our own bodies do as well. Personally as a dog owner, and many pet owners could most likely relate , our animals bring not only the warmth in our hearts but also the joy in our lives. Imagine if your own dog/cat was taken and tested within these laboratories, the mere idea in which your pet never comes home we could never fathom without a few tears in our eyes. That is the compassion we must show to all these animals brought into testing. Therefore, animal testing as a whole has brought many revolutionary impacts towards the modern day society, but as our society advances we should step aside from harmful testing methods when less cruel and more accurate demonstrations are an option as well.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Should the media promote these new kinds of testing methods? After learning about many massive outbreaks do you still feel our pharmacy testing are reliable? Prior to this blog what was your viewpoint on animal testing?
Anonymous said…
Personally, the idea of animal testing, or human testing, for the sake of the matter, both bother me and I am very strongly against those kinds of tests, particularly when it comes to non-medicinal substances like beauty products or even food and drink, or assorted chemicals. The idea of subjecting anything, particularly an animal with no real conscience or sense of good and bad, is abhorrent and deserves far more media attention than it receives. The idea that new, alternative, and potentially even safer and more effective methods of testing products are available is both relief inducing and sickening, because even though the potential for these animals to be spared is there, the companies responsible are not making the crucial switch. Animals deserve better.
Anonymous said…
Last year, I wrote an essay about animal testing and learned about how some cosmetic companies keep small rodents’ eyelids open with clips so that they can’t blink for days on end while makeup and moisturizers are applied to their eyes in the Draize test and I think that made me change the way I viewed some of the brands of makeup I’d seen around before (research said Urban Decay and Physician’s Formula are okay). Europe has already picked up in vitro testing for years now and I strongly feel that non-European countries’ press should promote that they follow suit.

Alice
Anonymous said…
Yes, Animal testing is a terrible thing, but we only care about animal testing if the company is testing on animals we actually care about. You look a puppy, a lamb, or even a tiger into the eyes you 100% won't like the idea of testing. Though if you're testing on rodents you don't really care. It's the mind set that we all have to keep our loved ones close and safe. I believe that in order to fix our world problems we need trials that do test on animals. First of course we should test on non living things but sooner of later that will have to transition on to animals. I do not agree with animal testing that will harm the animals just for the benefit to make humans life easier for example hair products.
Anonymous said…
While I think that animal testing has gotten us far in aspects like medical advancements, I think it is wrong to subject any living creature to such cruel and inhuman treatment. If we don't think it would be okay to do testing in that way on humans, then why should it be any different when it comes to animals. When we sacrifice another species for our own well-being, we turn our back on morality. I think to have safer and more efficient animal testing procedures would be like a double edged sword, reducing the animal's suffering but also raising the extent to which we think we can push the testing.
Anonymous said…
Animal testing has surely advanced the future of medicine and health. Like you said, diseases like polio like you mentioned would not have been destroyed it if weren’t for animal testing. But animal testing in unethical and unnecessary if animals don’t even model the human body well. I think with advancements in technology and our understanding of the human body, science tests can use computational modeling to accurately predict the impacts of different drugs and cosmetics. Dogs and cats are great but why don’t we use them for animals testing. Also since when did drugs need to be so powerful. People have lived long healthy lives without heartburn medication.
Adam Yook said…
I think that animals testing has been a necessary evil for many years. Without animal testing, many many of the products you mentioned would not be possible. Many human lives would be lost, and many more would be inconvenienced (that last part sounds a little bad...). However, now with new technologies, I think that animal testing can be extraordinarily reduced. Although the new methods are currently very expensive, so I can see animal testing continuing for a very long time until the technology necessary becomes much cheaper.
I never felt too comfortable about animal testing, especially for cosmetic purposes. However, It is incredible about how some animal testing saved so many from polio etc. Yet I do know that because of grassroots movements and a moral restraint, animal testing has become a lot more regulated. For instance now animals are set to be euthanized to limit any pain to the animal. And I hope that soon cosmetic animal testing will no longer exist. Urvi Vallapareddy
Anonymous said…
Testing on animals is obviously sad. Before this blog I didnt like it and after this blog I still dont agree with it. It’s probably not morally correct but how else are supposed to test our things? What are other things or ways we can test the safety of our products. I’m not saying I know the answer. But I do think we need to find other ways soon because while we have been doing this since forever i think with our new innovative technology there has to be another way.
Andrew Thomas said…
I personally think that the testing of animals for certain purposes such as cosmetic purposes is wrong. I think that doing these things to animals is as wrong as doing it to humans. I think we need to find other ways to go about things and I don’t like animals testing just for the production of human products.

-Andrew Thomas
Anonymous said…
My viewpoint on animal testing has always been that it is bad; however, I was unaware that animal testing results could differ from what actually occurs in humans. I do not think the media should promote animal testing, nor do I think they are. Beauty influencers, when promoting a product, always mention that it’s cruelty free. This shows the growing popularity against animal testing. I think that most of the pharmacy testing is reliable, but now I am not 100% sure. This makes me a little more concerned about the medicine that enters my body.
Anonymous said…
Although it is true that animal testing is bad, the lives of humans comes first. Scientists use animals in order to make sure their product is safe for humans. Of course this comes with its flaws, namely the horrible and unregulated conditions in which animals are put in for the testing procedures, but, again, human lives come first. You brought up "in vitro", and although I am not very informed of the matter, I do know that it can often be unreliable due to cells not acting properly when not in a perfect environment (having a simulated environment can often overlook things that are important for the cell and could impact results) and it is incredibly expensive and difficult to use practically. Hopefully these alternative methods get better in the future and test animals become treated better, but as of now, we cannot abolish animal testing, as it could very easily impact human well being.

For some reason I'm on my brothers account, but this is Umar.
Aerah Kim said…
Animal testing is a cruel thing to do to innocent animals, it does us, humans, to be protected from any harmful things that may go through us. It's understandable, that polio was found because of animal testing but what did they do to deserve this kind of testing. We are not able to help as much due to the fact that it really can't be tested on any other species but until now we have to wait for technology to be more advanced and cheaper.
Anonymous said…
I understand the reasoning behind animal testing, but that doesn’t necessarily agree with it. Testing on something because they’re disposable is not okay. At the same time, the scientists reasoning is valid; since animals are fairly close to humans and are easier to reproduce they’re more useful for tests. However, I disagree with the idea. On the other hand, I understand there are very few other options in the case of easy testing and it would take way more work.
Anonymous said…
Some things animal testing is cruel and unnecessary, especially make up and stuff. I think we have gotten better with that the past decades. They’re not disposable, I agree with that, but some things are more humane than others. Because they are closer to humans, and you don’t just throw a human in there, I understand.

Popular posts from this blog

Fake Meat Saves the Planet!

We Rarely Remember the Rare Minerals

Is it more beneficial to shower cold or hot water?