Alternatives To Animal Testing (MLA)
Arthur Sabian
Professor Lang
English 101 MWF
10/26/2013
Alternatives to Animal Testing (MLA)
“Man is the only creature that consumes without producing. He does not give milk, he does not lay eggs, he is too weak to pull the plough, he cannot run fast enough to catch rabbits. Yet he is lord of all the animals.” George Orwell. And now today animals are being used to produce a variety of products varying from medicine, cosmetics, and even military weapons through animal testing. One can argue we are the lord of all animals due to us being a higher species making our life more valuable than theirs. I’m not disputing that one animals life is more valuable than a human, but how about ten animals, 100 animals, 1,000 animals, how about 19.5 million …show more content…
Cosmetic companies like L’Oreal are causing atrocities on animals such as scarring, burns, and blinding of animals not to mention death for something as trivial as make-up which is something only a portion of the population needs. Cosmetic testing companies are in essence poisoning animals hoping that they will not be chemically scarred and instead find a product safe for use by humans. Why test cosmetics on animals when there are many alternatives. Why measure how long it takes for a chemical to burn away a bunny’s eye while companies can instead test the chemical on a synthetic human eye. An article by C.Bauch states that there are “mechanisms for induction and elicitation of skin sensitization are complex, we propose the combination of in vitro assays into an integrated test battery which can lead to an effective non-animal strategy.” What Bauch is saying is that instead of using technology is now available to allow testing of cosmetic products on invitro assays which are synthesized organic cells instead of living animals. Right now there are many cosmetic products that are animal test free. Recently the European Union banned the sales of any cosmetic product tested on animals. Why hasn’t America done the same? It is just absurd to kill and torture animals for something trivial as cosmetics, at least with medicine it’s not as …show more content…
Yes it may evolve science but these experiments leave atrocious results. Here’s a story about a sheep named dolly which was cloned. It was considered a success since they were able to create an exact genetic replicate, however due to genetic disease the clone died early. To use this story might not sound bad, but how about thinking of all the failed attempts before dolly all of the failed clones dead atrocious things that we created as humans. Another test would be the pit of despair where psychologist Harry Harlow took infant monkeys who bonded with their mothers and put them in caged pits with total isolation. The monkeys became clinically depressed and psychotic with none of them being treatable after the experiment was over. It is the same for other tests for the sake of science we might reach some sort of breakthrough but at what
Professor Lang
English 101 MWF
10/26/2013
Alternatives to Animal Testing (MLA)
“Man is the only creature that consumes without producing. He does not give milk, he does not lay eggs, he is too weak to pull the plough, he cannot run fast enough to catch rabbits. Yet he is lord of all the animals.” George Orwell. And now today animals are being used to produce a variety of products varying from medicine, cosmetics, and even military weapons through animal testing. One can argue we are the lord of all animals due to us being a higher species making our life more valuable than theirs. I’m not disputing that one animals life is more valuable than a human, but how about ten animals, 100 animals, 1,000 animals, how about 19.5 million …show more content…
Cosmetic companies like L’Oreal are causing atrocities on animals such as scarring, burns, and blinding of animals not to mention death for something as trivial as make-up which is something only a portion of the population needs. Cosmetic testing companies are in essence poisoning animals hoping that they will not be chemically scarred and instead find a product safe for use by humans. Why test cosmetics on animals when there are many alternatives. Why measure how long it takes for a chemical to burn away a bunny’s eye while companies can instead test the chemical on a synthetic human eye. An article by C.Bauch states that there are “mechanisms for induction and elicitation of skin sensitization are complex, we propose the combination of in vitro assays into an integrated test battery which can lead to an effective non-animal strategy.” What Bauch is saying is that instead of using technology is now available to allow testing of cosmetic products on invitro assays which are synthesized organic cells instead of living animals. Right now there are many cosmetic products that are animal test free. Recently the European Union banned the sales of any cosmetic product tested on animals. Why hasn’t America done the same? It is just absurd to kill and torture animals for something trivial as cosmetics, at least with medicine it’s not as …show more content…
Yes it may evolve science but these experiments leave atrocious results. Here’s a story about a sheep named dolly which was cloned. It was considered a success since they were able to create an exact genetic replicate, however due to genetic disease the clone died early. To use this story might not sound bad, but how about thinking of all the failed attempts before dolly all of the failed clones dead atrocious things that we created as humans. Another test would be the pit of despair where psychologist Harry Harlow took infant monkeys who bonded with their mothers and put them in caged pits with total isolation. The monkeys became clinically depressed and psychotic with none of them being treatable after the experiment was over. It is the same for other tests for the sake of science we might reach some sort of breakthrough but at what