Persuasive Essay: The Pros And Cons Of Animal Testing

More than 100 million animals are killed in U.S. laboratories every year, and for what? So that you can cover up a pimple or rock that lipstick? What’s worse, we don’t even have to do it. The reality is that the majority of animal experiments do not help advance products. We need to evolve from this barbaric and useless way of experimenting to a humane and actually \ more reliable way of testing that does not kill innocent animals.
According to the Federal Drug Administration “92% of drugs that pass animal tests fail in humans.” To be perfectly blunt, testing on animals is just bad science. We are putting small animals through an excruciatingly painful process with an 8% chance of success. Those odds don’t sound that great to me. Additionally, animal testing is just downright unethical. the animals that are forced to go through this experience many bad side effects for that 8% probability. They are faced with the initial abuse including: chemical burns, brain damage, implanting electrodes into the brain, maiming, blinding, and other painful procedures.According to an article from the new york times, “ They expect to eliminate the need for at least 95% of its animal testing within three years.”
It’s a method called “microdosing”. It’s when volunteers are given an extremely small one-time dose, and imaging technology is used to monitor how the drug behaves in the body. They replicate human responses more accurately than animal experiments.Unlike animal testing, microdosing is good science because the results from microdosing studies showing a correspondence with the actual results 3 out of 4 times. Also, microdosing takes only 4-6 months and costs 0.38 million dollars per product. In comparison, animal testing takes 18 months and costs a great deal more. this method is cheaper,more accurate and less time consuming in the