Ban on Animal Testing, the choice is not between humans and animals, but it is between good science and bad science.
|| Bhoomika Mohan
Every year, animals are used to develop medical treatments, determine the toxicity of medications, check the safety of products destined for human use, and other biomedical and health care uses.
A Peta report confirms that animals used for testing and experimentation are deliberately electroshocked in pain studies, are mutilated in experimental surgeries, and are injected with everything from cocaine to methamphetamine pumped into their bodies. They are given cancerous tumors and are injected with human cells in genetic-manipulation experiments.
Proponents of animal testing say that it has enabled the development of numerous life-saving treatments for both humans and animals. They argue that there is no alternative method for researching a complete living organism, and that strict regulations prevent the mistreatment of animals in laboratories.
With the availability of human based micro dosing, in vitro technology, human patient simulators, and computer modelling, why can we not conduct the experiments and tests with hundreds of such viable alternatives?
Before anything else is argued, everyone tends to pre-assume that the animals who serve as research samples are kept under decent conditions. However, that isn’t always the case, and some of the experimentation itself is cruel to the animals. Before anything, The complete ignorance regarding animal consent is pure exploitation of animal rights.
The U.S. drug industry invests $50 billion every year in research, and the approval rate for new medication is just as same as it was 50 years ago.
With all the technological advancements, if If we are still using the same methods of cruelty to test consumer products or find cures to diseases, then we are either too lazy or too cruel to innovate.
Additionally, Do animals not suffer from severe side effects after ingesting the various drugs and chemicals, 75% of which never occur in human beings?
For the record, in the year 2018, ‘In vivo testing’ used approximately 115 million animals for testing, and only 59 new medicines were approved by authorities.
After several monkeys died in unmanned space flights carried out during the 1940s, the first monkey to survive a space flight was Yorick, recovered from an Aerobee missile flight on Sep. 20, 1951. However, Yorick died several hours after landing, possibly due to heat stress.
When the increased adoption of domestic pets fueled interest in an anti-vivisection movement, primarily in England, little public objection to animal experimentation around 19th Century stood at rise.
In 2001, Dr. Michael Podell of Ohio State University infected cats with the feline AIDS virus in order to study why methamphetamine users deteriorate more quickly from the symptoms of AIDS.
All the arguments which are made in favour of Animal testing and experimentation seem to be extremely insensitive because it is obvious that one cannot take results from experiments on animals and apply them reliably to humans, because we’re different – physiologically, biochemically and metabolically from other species. What works for them might not work for us and in most cases, do not actually work for us.
Moreover, Whichever way one slice it, it’s wrong to sentence thinking, filling animals to a lonely life in a laboratory cage and subject them to terrifying, painful experiments.
Something which causes suffering on such a massive scale shall not be tolerated and given permissions to go ahead with their procedures at all.
According to Peta reports, More than 100 million mice and rats are killed in U.S. laboratories every year. They are abused in everything from toxicology tests (in which they are slowly poisoned to death) to painful burn experiments to psychological experiments that induce terror, anxiety, depression, and helplessness.
Experimental animals are virtually tortured to death. However, many people believe that animal testing is justified because the animals are sacrificed to make products safer for human use and consumption. The problem with this reasoning is that the animals’ safety, well-being, and quality of life is generally not a consideration.
Animal testing should be eliminated because it violates animals’ rights, it causes pain and suffering to the experimental animals, and other means of testing product toxicity are available. Humans cannot justify making life better for themselves by randomly torturing and executing thousands of animals per year to perform laboratory experiments or to test products.
There’s no justification as to why animals should not be treated with respect and dignity.