Arguments Against Animal Testing

There is estimated that 26 animals are used for testing, research and education in the US each year. More than 70.000 of them are nonhuman primates. Using animals as research subject in medical experiments is broadly condemned on two parts. The first one is because it wrongly violates the rights of animals, and second one, because it wrongly impose on sentient creatures much avoidable suffering. These two grounds are both deserve definitive dismissal.
People using animals for medical experiments to achieve the product safety. Animals are damaged and killed to test the safety of new agricultural and industrial chemicals, food additives and household cleaning products. They are force-fed substances, they have chemicals rubbed into their skin or dripped into their eyes and they are made to inhale smoke or toxic fumes to see how poisonous they are. Thankfully, testing cosmetic products and ingredients on animals within the European Union is now banned. Other countries still test cosmetics on animals, but as of March 11th 2013, no new cosmetic products that
In fact, studies of the predictability of animal experiments consistently show them to be worse than random guesswork. For example, in one paper that reviewed drugs whose toxicity to humans caused their withdrawal from the market (1960-1990), only 4 out of 24 cases were predictable from animal data. In another review only 6 of 114 human toxicities had animal correlates. Clearly, animal tests are failing to protect people. According to Hospital Doctor journal, only one per cent of adverse drug reactions are detected in trials. This is partly because common symptoms, such as nausea, dizziness, headaches and visual disturbance, are essentially impossible to detect in animals. Furthermore, the lives of commonly used laboratory animals are up to 66 times shorter than that of a human being - making it difficult to identify side effects that are slow to