Pros And Cons Of Animal Testing
Animal Testing is the force experimentation on animals against their free will, usually leading to pain, discomfort, or malnourishment. An average of 115 million animals every year are tested for scientific and commercial experiments (crueltyfreeinternational.org). These tests are not only inhumane, but the experiments are also unreliable, unnecessary, and not safe. The testing of animals has been around for centuries, using animals, in hope to find a cure for human diseases. According to procon.org, “Research on living animals has been practiced since at least 500 BC… Physician-scientists such as Aristotle, Herophilus, and Erasistratus performed the experiments to discover the functions of living organisms.” These living organisms, which
…show more content…
However, there are alternatives to animal testing that work just as well or even better than animal testing. With today’s advanced technology, Artificial human skin is now available for testing like EpiDerm and ThinCert (procon.org). These scientifically advanced tests are not only more reliable than animal experimentation, but they also waste less resources than animal tests. As stated on procon.org, “In vitro (in glass) testing, such as studying cell cultures in a petri dish, can produce more relevant results than animal testing because human cells can be used.” From this information researchers can begin to understand the fact that animals are no longer needed to figure out human diseases. Other than in glass and artificial skin (procon.org), plants can and have been used for testing (Woods, 25). Some plants that have been used are beans for eye medicine in the EyeTex factories, pumpkin for skin medicine in SkinTex facilities, and other foods that have been proven to help resist cancer (Woods, 25). With all of these alternatives, why risk the lives of animals when there are other ways to help that are more reliable and safer that regular painful animal
However, there are alternatives to animal testing that work just as well or even better than animal testing. With today’s advanced technology, Artificial human skin is now available for testing like EpiDerm and ThinCert (procon.org). These scientifically advanced tests are not only more reliable than animal experimentation, but they also waste less resources than animal tests. As stated on procon.org, “In vitro (in glass) testing, such as studying cell cultures in a petri dish, can produce more relevant results than animal testing because human cells can be used.” From this information researchers can begin to understand the fact that animals are no longer needed to figure out human diseases. Other than in glass and artificial skin (procon.org), plants can and have been used for testing (Woods, 25). Some plants that have been used are beans for eye medicine in the EyeTex factories, pumpkin for skin medicine in SkinTex facilities, and other foods that have been proven to help resist cancer (Woods, 25). With all of these alternatives, why risk the lives of animals when there are other ways to help that are more reliable and safer that regular painful animal