Community Problem Report
Abstract
When it comes to the to the topic of animal testing, there has been a debate for decades. This debates consists on whether keep practicing experiments with animals or to stop doing it. The purpose of using animals in experimentation is to get a better understanding of the body, develop medical advances, as well as creating new ways or methods to treat different diseases, or even create a cure for them. But specially since the creation of the “3 Rs”, which stand for reducing the number of animals used in experiments, reduce the pain to which the animal are exposed, and replace the use of animals with non-animals alternatives when possible, the argumentation against this type of experimentation was growth dramatically. And these activists that are against animal testing are seeking to end this type of experimentation and replace it, in order to save not just humans but animals as well.
Animal testing is a very discussed topic in these days, because there are so many people against it, as well as supporting it. There are many people in society concerned about what happens to the animals when they are used for experimentation, because these persons are trying to avoid the mistreatment of the animals in the laboratories. Also the people that is supporting it, says that animal testing needs to be done for the sake of science, in order to develop advances in medications, as well as in treatments. But it is a very controversial theme due to the reason that it involves very difficult ethical judgment. So it really depends on each person’s morals. And throughout the last years the society has growth interest in this topic, joining organizations, doing protests, and even video tape some of the laboratories, in order to cease or end animal experimentation, as well as other people defending it, by saying how much animal testing has helped our society to make medical advances.
Meaning of Animal Testing
There is an estimation that about 26 million animals are used every year in the United States for the sake of scientific testing (Jay Rakow, 2009). Animal testing contributes in many kinds of ways, such as in developing medical treatments, check new treatments or medicines, or to determine the toxicity of a medication. The experimentation on animals has been practiced since many decades before Christ. But even though it has helped in developing numerous life-saving treatments and in creating new and more secure ways of medication, there are people against it for many reasons. Because the testing on animals does not only has good and positive results, it also ends up having various types of disadvantages. Opponents to this kind of experimentation say that it is a cruel and inhumane way of experimentation, and that there should be an alternative to animal testing, because animals are different from humans and the experiments often gives irrelevant results (Harley, E. 2008). And even though there is no no way to substitute the animal testing, because the experimentation experimentation needs to be done in a living organism, these persons still fight person's still fight for their goal. But in orderto not ignore the voice of all these voice of all these people, different strict regulations have been created in order created in order to prevent the mistreatment of animals in the laboratories. But t laboratories. But there is an statement done by Wishart, which says that the persons says that the persons against animal testing are not completely against it in a general way, against it in a general way, they are just seeking to remove all the animal cruelty, because the animal cruelty, because according to them is not just for an animal to be locked up his animal to be locked up his or her entire life in a laboratory cage (2006). So sometimes the (2006). So sometimes the goal of these people leans more towards ending the cruelty and mistreatment rather than animal testing as a whole.
History of Animal Testing
Animal testing has been occurring throughout history, since the early year of 500 BC. There were found proofs that animal experimentation has existed during this period of time, these proofs included writings form ancient Greek. Different physicians and scientists had performed the experimentation on animals in order to discover and increase their knowledge of the functions of living organisms. These scientists were Aristotle, Herophilus, and Erasistratus. The way animal testing was discovered or how it started, was during the times of ancient Rome and Alexandria, when scientists practiced the dissection on human criminals, but afterwards prohibitions against mutilation of the human body led the scientists to continue their experiments on animals. According to Brooks, “Aristotle believed animals lacked intelligence, and so the notions of justice and injustice did not apply to them”. But his successor, Theophrastus, disagreed by saying that animals can actually feel pain, and causing pain to animals was an affront to the gods (2012). With the animal testing in early years many discoveries were made, such as that the arteries contained blood, because before this experiment was done it was believed that the arteries contained air. Also another discovery was that the heart, not the lungs, circulated blood throughout the body.
Consequences of Animal Testing
The consequences of animal testing are both good and bad. Just like there are developments or advances in the medical region, and discoveries of new drugs or treatments that save many lives, it also creates the death of many animals, and the suffering of them when drugs are put in their bodies. The California Biomedical Research Association states that every medical advancement in the last 100 years has been a result from an animal experimentation (2012). Also experiments, such as the removement of the pancreas from a dog, led to the discovery of insulin, which is critical for saving the life of diabetics. Also according to ProCon, the polio vaccine, which was tested on animals, reduced the global occurrence of the disease from 350,000 cases in 1988 to 223 cases in 2012 (2014). Also animal testing has contributed to may others major advances, as well as the understanding of the body and diseases, such as in cancer, brain , brain injuries, leukemia, malaria, tuberculosis, and many others mortal diseases. Therefore as diseases. Therefore as Chris Abee tells us, “We would not have a vaccine for hepatitisB vaccine for hepatitis B without chimpanzees,” and says that they are our best hope for finding our best hope for finding the cure for Hepatitis C (2011). But as well as many good things can a many good things can come with animal testing also bad consequences occur at consequences occur at the same time. In the Figure 2 there is a graph with some animal species with some animal species with a percentage, which represent the quantity of animals used quentity of animals used in animal experimentation, which the majority of them are majorityof them are mice. So according to Humane Society International, “animals International, "animals used in experiments are commonly subjected to force feeding, forced to force feeding, forced inhalation, food and water deprivation, prolonged periods of prolonged periods of physical restraint, the infliction of burns and other wounds to study its other wounds to study its effects and remedies, and killing by carbon dioxide asphyxiation, dioxide asphyxiation, neck-breaking, decapitation, or other means (n.d).” An example were these atrocities are committed is when cosmetic products are tested in animals. A more specific example is the evaluation of irritation done by a shampoo, were rabbits are incapacitated in stocks with clips on their eyes, so they cannot close them, and being held this way for multiple days. So it is a very controversial topic when deciding what side is the correct one.
Substituting Animal Testing
Some specialists say that there is no adequate alternative for animal testing, while others stipulate that there are alternative testing methods and can replace the use of animals. The living systems of a human or an animal are very complex, because both involve many different types of systems and cells. So in order to study them a living body needs to be involved, because for example, in order to evaluate a drug to know its side effects, a circulatory system to carry the medicine or drug to different organs needs to be involved. Therefore according to V. Monamy, “the computer models can only be reliable if accurate information gleaned from animal research is used to build the models in the first place (2009).” Furthermore, not even the most powerful computers are able to simulate the functions of very complicated organs such as the brain. And in the other side, there are many people who can assure there are alternatives for the animal testing. One of them is the studying of cell cultures in a petri dish, which can produce more accurate results than the animal testing, because actual human cells can be used. Also contradicting the people that assure that computers cannot simulate the experiments, G. Mone says that, “computer models, such as the virtual reconstructions of human molecular structures, can predict the toxicity of substances without invasive experiments on animals (2014).” So again it is very difficult whether to believe one or the other, due to the involvement of each person’s morals on the topic.
Animal testing is a very controversial theme or topic, because it really depends on each person’s morals whether to decide if this type of experimentation is right or wrong. Also many facts are given as well as statements of very specialized people, which have been involved for many years in animal testing, but again half of them can tell you a thousand reasons why we should continue to practice it and the other half can give you another thousand reasons of why we need to stop it. So each person should consider all the consequences of animal testing and then decide whether it is right or wrong to do it. Therefore, for all this reasons there are people who support it and there are people who go against it.
References
Animal Testing (2014, January 29). Animal Testing ProCon Retrieved from http://animal-testing.procon.org/
Brooks, M. (2012). The truth about animal testing. New Statesman, 141(5115), 14.
Ferdowsian, H. R., & Beck, N. (2011). Ethical and scientific considerations regarding animal testing and research. Plos ONE, 6(9), 1-4. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0024059
Harley, E. (2008, October 1). Understanding Animal Research. Retrieved October 12, 2014.
Monamy, V. (2009). Animal Experimentation. [Online]. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511801808
Mone, G. (2014). New models in cosmetics replacing animal testing. Communications Of The ACM, 57(4), 20-21. doi:10.1145/2581925
Stevenson, T. A. (2012). Codification of animal testing policy. Federal Register, 77(126), 38751-38754.
Animal Testing. (2006, July 24). Retrieved October 23, 2014.
Studt, T. (2014). Promise or curse?. Laboratory Equipment, 6.
