April 23, 2012
Persuasive Argument Essay
Animal Testing: Behind the Experiments
Cruel, inhumane, and unnecessary. Those are just a few of the terms that come to mind when I think about animal testing. Animal testing has been a heated topic of debate for many years, throughout classrooms and medical facilities alike. In many cases, animal testing has proven to be a rather inaccurate method for testing human medications and cosmetics. For example, in the book, Animal Research Takes Lives: Humans and Animals Both Suffer by Betty Overell, the founder of the New Zealand Anti-Vivisection Society, claimed that in 1983, the painkiller Butazolidin (by t -z l -d n) caused nearly 600 human deaths in the United States alone. These deaths were not foreseen beforehand, as the test subjects were animals, not humans. Overell went on to explain that none of the many different species tested on experienced any adverse side-effects to the medication, yet it caused many complications when taken by humans (Overell 290). In addition to inaccuracy, animal testing is inhumane to the animals involved, both during testing and while they are awaiting testing, and lastly, is unnecessary due to the advancements in the field of medical research.
First off, throughout the history of testing on animals, many human lives have been lost due to inaccuracies that have occurred during animal testing. There have been many cases where an animal showed no side effects when subjected to a specific medication. When that same medication was tested on humans, however, the reaction was completely different. Take the antidiarrheal drug, Clioquinol, for example. At the time of its release, this drug not only passed tests on rats and dogs, but in cats and rabbits as well. None of the animals were said to have experienced any adverse side effects. However, humans reacted in an entirely different manner. Clioquinol caused blindness and even paralysis in many of...