Regulatory agencies across the globe make it mandatory for companies to get their 'products' tested for toxicity before making them available in the market. Our heart goes out for these tiny creatures, who have no idea what's happening to them. An example of this issue is aspirin. Testing animals to see if a product is safe may be better than testing humans first, but that also means the life of an animal is devalued. Laboratory mice, for example, live for only two to three years, so researchers can study the effects of treatments or genetic manipulation over a whole lifespan, or across several generations, which would be infeasible using human subjects.
The lab-grown skin is used to test cosmetics and help reduce the number of animals used in testing. These groups believe that this practice is most inhuman and degrading for animals that do not have the ability to defend themselves. There are three groups of people formed due to this scientific research using animals. Animals have been the center of testing for thousands of years. Animals feel distress during this process, and this article reports that labs, because of the pain and discomfort felt by animals, are being asked to use anesthesia. Living systems like human beings and animals are extremely complex.
The tests have to be continued in order to detect information on major health problems such as liver damage, elevated blood pressure, nerve damage, damage to the fetus, etc. Basically, whether this practice is good or bad really depends on who you are asking. On one hand it is emotion that guides us to such measures to keep the human race going, and on the other hand it is this very emotion that has our hearts go out to all the defenseless animals that are put through such tests and experiments. This article provides a brief history of animal testing, including animal testing completed by the Greeks and Romans in the 2nd century and more recent testing on chimpanzees. There are many animal rights group that claim killing animals is inhumane. On the basis of these tests, it is determined whether the said product is fit for human use or not. In many countries, the average life expectancy of a human exceeds 70 years of age.
Many companies are pro animal testing, as it tends to be one of the least expensive methods of testing to ensure consumer safety. If a cure for a condition is discovered, the animal reaps the benefits of the cure as well. Animals have many systems that are so very similar to a humans that they are the perfect substitute for a person. Proponents of animal testing say that it has enabled the development of numerous life-saving treatments for both humans and animals, that there is no alternative method for researching a complete living organism, and that strict regulations prevent the mistreatment of animals in laboratories. All of the accused and recorded staff involved were fired and prosecuted.
There are endless arguments for and against animal testing. However, some scientists break this law as well, just like any other law. In addition, animals have similar enough bodily constitutions to make the comparisons relevant and effective. While many of you may argue about even considering the pros and cons of animal experimentation, you must be aware of the fact that in the past, and to this date, there are a lot of breakthroughs, especially in the world of medicine, that have been made by means of such tests. The amount of stress that these animals are subjected to when they are kept in isolation also questions the credibility of the end results which are bound to be influenced by their stress levels.
Let us not forget that laws have been developed for the protection of animals, during the process of laboratory testing. Helps in assuring that substances and medicines created are safe for living organisms. In addition to this, animal testing has also helped in the refinement of procedures, related to measuring the blood pressure, pacemaker technology and the perfection of the heart and lung disease treatments. Selection bias was a major problem, but even with randomization and blinding technique used, proper selection of animals still failed. This is the reason of the American Veterinary Medical Association to endorse this practice. It is performed despite the existence of less expensive alternatives.
In so many different ways, animals differ from people, and therefore are seen as bad test subjects. People are now suggesting use of tissue culture, statistics and even computer models for carrying out the test. There is no guarantee that a particular product will not harm us just because it didn't harm the particular species on which it was tested. In California, a monkey bred at the University of California, Riverside, had the lids of his eyes sewn shut and a heavy device was lodged onto his head. Many facilities are exempt from animal welfare laws. Without animals to test the vaccine or treatment on, there would be no sure way to find out if it would work for millions of others over the years.
Animals cannot speak, so how can we determine whether or not and the level of pain the poor creature is going through? Offer benefits to animals themselves Animal experimentation is not only beneficial to humans but animals as well. Given these circumstances, animals used in experimentation do serve as appropriate research subjects. As of now, there are methods such as growing and testing human tissue cultures rather than animals. Let's see some of these animal testing pros that makes proponents of animal experimentation argue for use of animals in research. Humans and animals are also biologically similar, having the same set of organs, bloodstream and central nervous system, which is why they are affected with the same diseases and health conditions. Human genes cloned into microorganisms can yield more specific toxicology results, for example, than simply administering toxins to animals. Aristotle believed that animals lacked intelligence, and so the notions of justice and injustice did not apply to them.