Should Animal Testing Be Banned
Should animal testing be banned?
For many centuries people have experimented on animals. The two main reasons for doing this is first, to find out more about the animals themselves, and, secondly, to test out substances and procedures to see if they are harmful and decide whether it can be used on human beings or not. In the second category fall cosmetic products as well as medicines and surgical techniques. There is a growing consensus that it is not acceptable to test cosmetic products on animals. This debate is about whether we should experiment on animals for scientific and medical purposes. The debate about the pros and cons of animal experimentation is one that elicits very strong emotions: animal rights activists have resorted to trespass, violence, and death threats.
Con: Experiments on animals should be considered on a case-by-case basis. However, reduction of human suffering is our first priority and the prevention of animal suffering or death is. So that if there is a decent chance that an experiment will result in an important medical breakthrough that will reduce human suffering and death then it is justifiable to allow animal suffering.
Pro: Animals have the right to be treated as beings of value in themselves, not as the means to human ends. This principle must be applies in order to guarantee the end of cruelty to animals. The meaning of this principle means that animals should not be experimented upon whatever the potential gain for humanity. To infect monkeys with the AIDS virus or to expose rodents to toxic chemicals and radiation is simply not acceptable, whatever the supposed benefits.
Con: Although in principle it is more important to reduce human suffering that to prevent animal suffering, in practice it is possible to keep animal suffering to an absolute minimum. How ever, animal experimenters can test animal with medicine that are good for human and also can keep animals in clean, comfortable and healthy conditions. In short,
For many centuries people have experimented on animals. The two main reasons for doing this is first, to find out more about the animals themselves, and, secondly, to test out substances and procedures to see if they are harmful and decide whether it can be used on human beings or not. In the second category fall cosmetic products as well as medicines and surgical techniques. There is a growing consensus that it is not acceptable to test cosmetic products on animals. This debate is about whether we should experiment on animals for scientific and medical purposes. The debate about the pros and cons of animal experimentation is one that elicits very strong emotions: animal rights activists have resorted to trespass, violence, and death threats.
Con: Experiments on animals should be considered on a case-by-case basis. However, reduction of human suffering is our first priority and the prevention of animal suffering or death is. So that if there is a decent chance that an experiment will result in an important medical breakthrough that will reduce human suffering and death then it is justifiable to allow animal suffering.
Pro: Animals have the right to be treated as beings of value in themselves, not as the means to human ends. This principle must be applies in order to guarantee the end of cruelty to animals. The meaning of this principle means that animals should not be experimented upon whatever the potential gain for humanity. To infect monkeys with the AIDS virus or to expose rodents to toxic chemicals and radiation is simply not acceptable, whatever the supposed benefits.
Con: Although in principle it is more important to reduce human suffering that to prevent animal suffering, in practice it is possible to keep animal suffering to an absolute minimum. How ever, animal experimenters can test animal with medicine that are good for human and also can keep animals in clean, comfortable and healthy conditions. In short,