Professor A. Quispe
March 07, 2013
Animal Testing Con or Pro
Do you ever think about if you are against or in favor of animal research? Animal experimentation is disputed because some people are favor and some are against. Animal research is used to discover those diseases that are without cure and to give the answers to the scientific community. Additionally, the animal experiments begin in ancient Rome and Greece. In the United States all pharmaceutical companies need first to experiment with the animals before humans. Nevertheless, without animal experimentation many of the most important advances in modern medicine would never have occurred. These experiments are important because scientists need to make sure that medicines are as safe and as good as possible before doctors give them to people and to discover more about how the medication works on human bodies.
In the article “Animal Testing Is Cruel and Immoral Regardless of the Benefits Associated With It,” by George Wright and Steve Hoagland, the authors, argue that the use of animals for medical experiments is an immoral practice. The authors describe why people do not ask if the human species is more deserving of under going medical experiments than the animals. Also, in the article by Peter Singer, he said that if we share with them a capacity to suffer, this means that animals like people have interests. Like racism or sexists who believe that those who belong to their race or sex are superior, we are doing the same to the animals. But, there is no difference because animals also can feel. Why can only animals suffer? Wright and Hoagland demonstrate, that the human take advantage to govern the animals like capturing them and holding them in tiny cages. The authors give examples, about the last incident in 1983 at the University of Pennsylvania in which 150 baboons suffered brain damage. No doubt, there are a lot of cruelty of animals, but not just for the the medical experiments but also by other cruelty of people. In addition, people kill animals only for food and they are killing them in a cruel way. According to Wright and Hoagland, “People who own pets may hold a different view regarding species differentiation than those who do not own them”. This means that people who have pets can see that animals like humans, that brings love, happiness and don’t try to hurt them.
Wright and Hoagland examine, why it is impossible for people see a pig dying only to make bacon, but why it is not satisfactory for people to see the pig being a medical experiment? Furthermore, the number of animals killed each year for experiments is from 50 to 100 million. Besides that, the British Union for the laboratory of animals include testing for toxicity, brain research, dental research, and surgical experiments. Wright and Hoagland argue, “Some defenders of animal experimentation seek to ease their guilt by suggesting that animals may, in some way, experience less pain than humans”. This shows that some people think that the animals can’t feel like humans do but they are wrong because animals do feel pain. In the article, researchers say that mammals have similar nerve structures for feeling pain like humans. Additionally, the authors ask the question if humans are more deserving than others species. More importantly, if people were asked to choose between curing their diseases or saving the lives of a dozen mice the people wouldn't waiver, to involve animals in the research project. The authors ask, would you think that the mice and chimpanzees agree with this? Next, is a difference between humans and animals, and that animals don’t consent to be used in research. Lastly, the authors argue, why people don’t produce humans to do medical experiments. If we have age three or four months from about to be aborted fetuses that can be like a medical experiments. So, why don’t we use them? Wright and Hoagland question, “The four percentage...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document