The Pros And Cons Of Human Testing On Animals
I think human testing is good because of these reasons. Without human testing we most likely
wouldn't be here today. Testing on animals isn't always accurate. Doctors wouldn't know if the
newest vaccine will work on a human being if they just tested it on animals. Even if we test it on
our closest genetic ancestors (i.e. Apes), we wouldn't be sure if the medicine works on humans.
Apes are underdeveloped and live in the wild, so they're able to withstand the obstacles the
environment throws at them better then man. Plus their body isn't as equal as ours. We need
people to test on. You might be thinking "what if something goes wrong?" Most of these human
test subjects volunteered or signed a contract guaranteeing that they'll be receive …show more content…
It's one thing to
mass-murder animals for food, or force them to entertain, but using them to cure or fix
something that they aren't bothered by is a whole different level. Man has practically enslaved
every animal on this planet. Testing on animals is inaccurate and is a waste of lives and time. An
experiment needs to be accurate and useful. Abigail Geer, the co founder of Mino Valley Farm
Sanctuary, says "Animal testing is unethical, inhumane and completely unnecessary. With so
many alternatives available to us, how can we justify the poisoning, burning, shocking and killing
of more than 100 million animals each year causing them unimaginable pain, fear and
loneliness?" Study's show that the distress that laboratory animals are forced to endure has been
proven to cause unpredictable changes in neurochemistry, genetic expression and nerve
regeneration, leading to unreliable and ineffective results.
We can't just stop testing on humans. It's like trying to shove a mess under the carpet. You will
still have the guilt and eventually it's going to come back to haunt you. Humanity has been
testing with humans since the dawn of man. Cavemen would try eating plants to see if they
wouldn't be here today. Testing on animals isn't always accurate. Doctors wouldn't know if the
newest vaccine will work on a human being if they just tested it on animals. Even if we test it on
our closest genetic ancestors (i.e. Apes), we wouldn't be sure if the medicine works on humans.
Apes are underdeveloped and live in the wild, so they're able to withstand the obstacles the
environment throws at them better then man. Plus their body isn't as equal as ours. We need
people to test on. You might be thinking "what if something goes wrong?" Most of these human
test subjects volunteered or signed a contract guaranteeing that they'll be receive …show more content…
It's one thing to
mass-murder animals for food, or force them to entertain, but using them to cure or fix
something that they aren't bothered by is a whole different level. Man has practically enslaved
every animal on this planet. Testing on animals is inaccurate and is a waste of lives and time. An
experiment needs to be accurate and useful. Abigail Geer, the co founder of Mino Valley Farm
Sanctuary, says "Animal testing is unethical, inhumane and completely unnecessary. With so
many alternatives available to us, how can we justify the poisoning, burning, shocking and killing
of more than 100 million animals each year causing them unimaginable pain, fear and
loneliness?" Study's show that the distress that laboratory animals are forced to endure has been
proven to cause unpredictable changes in neurochemistry, genetic expression and nerve
regeneration, leading to unreliable and ineffective results.
We can't just stop testing on humans. It's like trying to shove a mess under the carpet. You will
still have the guilt and eventually it's going to come back to haunt you. Humanity has been
testing with humans since the dawn of man. Cavemen would try eating plants to see if they