English Composition 1
November 29, 2012
Animal Rights and Testing
Every year, there is over two hundred million innocent animals are injured or killed in scientific experiments across the world. Out of these animals, between seventeen and twenty million are used in the United States alone. It’s been known that an animal dies in a laboratory every three seconds. Those in favor of animal experimentation say they’re taking animals’ lives to save humans. But is it really necessary to subject animals to torturous conditions or painful experiments in the name of science? Is it right to destroy and take an animals’ life just by testing shampoos and makeup? Animal experimentation, like many of the issues we face today, is difficult to argue against, and just as hard to support. Animal right activists are against using animals for medical research, but there seems to be some exceptions to this rule. For one, we do not experiment on humans without their consent. How do scientists get the animals consent? (Lin, Doris). Vast majority of experiments using animals are so invasive and injurious, they could never consider allowing humans to even consent to these types of experiments being used on animals. Some people question, if ending vivisection would medical progress end? The answer would be no, because non-animal testing would still be done. Since there are so many medical issues that go unexplored because of lack of resources that if they would take the resources used in animal research and redirected it towards non-animal research the medical progress would continue. (“Why is it wrong to test on animals). Unfortunately in animal testing, there are many animals that are tested for substances that will never see approval or public consumption and use. Thus, leaving animals dyeing in vain because no direct benefit. (Using Animals for Testing Pros versus Cons). There has to be a better way of testing then to measure how long it takes a chemical to burn...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document