The Study on Animal Experimentation

Exclusively available on PapersOwl
Updated: Oct 19, 2023
Read Summary
Cite this
The Study on Animal Experimentation

An analytical essay focusing on the methodologies, practices, and results derived from animal experimentation. By reviewing key studies, their findings, and their impact on human health, we aim to present a comprehensive overview of the landscape of animal-based research. Also at PapersOwl you can find more free essay examples related to Animal Testing topic.

Date added
Pages:  7
Words:  2225
Order Original Essay

How it works

Animal testing has been a severe problem that still has not been resolved. Animal testing should be stopped for the safety of animals and human, but since it cannot be, how can it be improved? Many scientists rely on animal testing to collect data on safety and efficacy from experiments. They use animals to test products like food, drugs, cosmetics, medicines, and chemicals. They use animals because animals serve to protect consumers, workers and the environment from the harmful effects of chemicals (Botting 162).

Need a custom essay on the same topic?
Give us your paper requirements, choose a writer and we’ll deliver the highest-quality essay!
Order now

The chemicals’ effect on the people and animals are similar, so scientists is exposed to be understood. One problem is that pain and suffering are inflicted on these animals. The other problem is that the information they receive from the animals is sometimes inaccurate compared to humans, causing the experiment to be a waste of time. Animal testing is unsafe, unreliable, and causes animals to go through pain which they cannot explain. Animal testing needs to be improved by making the tests more advanced so that they can be safer and faster. Animal subjects should also be given medication and attention so that they can feel better after the tests.

Animals often get tested for a good purpose, but the way they get tested is too harmful and unacceptable. Animals get tested for scientists to discover the activity that occurs in the living body when it is given or around any cautious products. There are plenty of new medicines, cosmetics, chemicals, and composed items that are being made every day, and needs to be tested. There is available information stating that, New medicines require testing because researchers must measure both the beneficial and the harmful effects of a compound on a whole organism, which gives the whole purpose of why it is so important for products like medicines to get tested before selling (Animal Research ). These products have to get tested in some kind of way before getting in contact with human, making them ill and killing them. Before selling these products, pharmaceutical companies strictly demand the testing results and data on them. The reason why they demand the testing results because if someone purchases a product with untested chemicals in it, and the chemicals turns out to be toxic, the customers who bought it can become ill from it. Their whole body can get affected, possibly leading to death, which may also lead to the company getting sued, or even a little jail time might have to get involved. To prevent these extreme problems from occurring, scientists run tests on these new products, using animals.

Testing animals for the use of humans has become a more substantial dilemma than before because of technology. Scientists believe that the technology we have been having for the last 10 years is proficient, causing them to not worry about the animals that are getting tested on; They feel that the animals are in the great hands of technology. Animals that are most often used in experimentation are rats, mice, monkeys, birds, fishes, cats, and dogs. Animals are used to be tested in many fields of research: cognitive, behavioral, military, biomedical, automotive, agricultural, and in consumer product testing. Out of the seven fields of research, animals are most likely to get tested in the biomedical and behavioral fields. Testing in the field of biomedical, they use animals to test new medicines. Testing in the field of behavior, animals get tested on their behavior after performing certain tasks. For an example, scientist Harry F. Harlow, showed that mother love was emotional rather than physiological, substantiating the adoption-friendly theory that continuity of care ‘nurture’ was a far more determining factor in healthy psychological development than ‘nature.’ Harlow tested the effect of attachment on a baby monkey to see how he will get emotionally attached to someone who he thinks will protect him. When the baby monkey is frightened, will he run to a wired mother, covered in a soft comforting cloth or will he run to a metal robot who has a bottle in its hand? Based on the experiment, the baby monkey ran to the wired mother covered with the soft cloth, which was comforting to him. This experiment shows the similarity between animals and humans because of the emotional attachment they can have to our mother. When we are first born, we instantly get attached to our mother, knowing that she will protect us.

One of the major problems that comes from animal experimentation is when scientists perform experimentation on animals; they ignore the resulting effect it has on the animal. Testing animals often leads to making animals sick, harming them, and killing them as well. The IFC Science article explains:

Animals rely on human observers to recognise pain and to evaluate its severity and impact. Without the ability to understand soothing words that explain that following surgery to repair a bone fracture, their pain will be managed (hopefully) and will subside, animals may also suffer more when in pain than we do. . .[t]he debate around animals’ capacity to experience pain and suffer raged in the 20th century, but as we developed a greater understanding of pain, and studied its impact on the aspects of animal life that we could measure, we veterinary surgeons, along with many behavioural and animal scientists, recognised the significant impact of untreated pain, and we now believe this experience causes them to suffer. (1)

This piece of evidence first points out the fact that animals often hurt more than humans do. When animals hurt and go through pain, humans just brush it off their shoulders, not caring as much as they should. Additionally, animals cannot express their feelings because they cannot talk to humans, telling them how they feel. They expect humans to show them affection automatically, especially after getting hurt from experiments, but instead, humans make them feel irrelevant. This piece of evidence also shows that the pain and suffering animals go through from experiments are present, and has been present from a long time now, currently getting ignored. Not only animals go through the pain and suffering from experiments, but half of the time the collect data is not correct.

Another major problem that comes from animal experimentation is that most of the data that is being collected from the tests are not accurate. Using animals for testing human products is not always reliable because the data that scientists may receive from an animal can be different from what they will receive testing it on a human. The article The Cruelty and Waste of Animal Experimentation mentions that the differences between other species and humans make translating data from animals to people problematic and outlines the current issue of testing and experimenting on animals (2). This article summarizes how using animals for the testing of human medication, which can rise to misleading results because of the difference between human and other species, is cruel and a waste of our beautiful animals. It makes a note of the fact that animals and humans are different, so the data that they will receive from an animal, can be different from the data that they will receive from a human; proving that using animals for experiments is unnecessary because the results can be inaccurate.

Continuing the problem of inaccurate data coming from animal testing, Paul Furlong states that “”it’s very hard to create an animal model that even equates closely to what we’re trying to achieve in the human.”” Stating this fact shows that animals are different from human beings, and no matter how close scientists can get to data that they are trying to receive, it still may not be accurate. A way that we can solve this problem, improving animal testing, is using humans for the testing for human toxicity, to get more accurate information. Though it may be a risky factor. Using humans to test for human toxicity can cause hem to get more accurate information, so that they can stop wasting animals for these experiments. They can use toxicity testing for better tests because toxicity testing has improved over the past several years.

Even though scientists are not going to completely stop animal experimentation, they should also improve the conditions in which the tests can be more advanced, safer, and accurate. There are a number of ways to improve animal testing. Research shows that animal testing can be improved by making the tests more accurate. The tests can also be improved by making them quicker and safer. Scientists should consider making the experiments quicker and more advanced to keep the animals under safe conditions. The National Anti-Vivisection Society online website mentions, Many chemicals used in products today have not been tested, so their safety is largely unknown, and new chemicals and products are entering the marketplace at an ever-increasing pace (The Cruelty ). When the experiment is taking days or any long periods of time, there are other products that are being made with deadly chemicals in it. Scientists are unable to get test upcoming chemicals because of their focus on another product. If the tests are being completed quicker, they are able to keep up with the products that contains deadly chemicals. Making experiments faster can also prevent the animal from getting drain and get weaken from going through diagnostics longer, defeating them, and causing them to lose their fight. Making the test go faster, will allow them to recover, having a chance to heal from the damages of the experiment.

The opposing audience thinks that animal testing is already improved and brilliant because the humans are still being protected from deadly chemicals. They feel that animal testing is positive because people are not getting harmed, animals are — for the sake of people. They believe that it is acceptable that animals are getting tested to keep humans safe from chemicals and death leading substances, which found in most products. They believe that since humans do not have to suffer or get her in any kind of way, it is a good idea to test on animals. Animals do not feel pain like humans do, and they can careless about getting experimented on. Another claim that is being brought up is the high quality chemicals that are used everywhere today can dissolve in water substances, and diffuse in the air around us. We do not notice the chemicals that are hidden in the things that we are consuming and using every day, which is why animal testing looks like a good method in the opposing audience eyes.

The article of Pros and Cons on Animal Testing clarifies, Discriminating against animals because they do not have the cognitive ability, language, or moral judgment that humans do is no more justifiable than discriminating against human beings with severe mental impairments, which shows how it should not be acceptable to think that animals can get experimented on because they do not have most of the advantages humans have (6). A human being with severe mental impairments is almost no different from an animal because an animal is viewed to most of us as humans who are has severe mental impairments, limited from performing tasks that we do. Lastly, information coming from Pesticides includes that [e]ven the least-toxic products can cause health problems if an animal is exposed to enough of it . . . [s]ome animals may be more sensitive than others (4). Testing chemicals on living organisms can completely kill the organism, no matter how least or great the toxic may be, it depends on how much is given to the animal. Furthermore, how do scientist know which animals are sensitive, and which are strong? How would they know the amount doses to give the animal, that will get him his results, and keep the animal safe? The overall argument about testing any chemicals on animals should be reconsidered because even a single dose of medicine can kill the animal, and the opposing audience to this argument do not see the affection and pain that animals go through from this.

Animal testing has been an overlooked situation for decades now. Animal testing helps keep human being safe by testing chemicals and products before we buy them, but animal testing is unhealthy for animals. It causes animals to suffer and go through pain, without anyone taking proper care of them. Human beings pass up the fact that animals hurt more than them, thinking that they have no emotion at all. Animal testing causes other problems that make it tough on scientists as well, like collecting in accurate data for humans from animals; but since it seems that it cannot be stopped, there are ways that it can be improved. We can make the tests advanced and make them quicker for the sake of animals. We can make sure that animals have the treatment, love, and attention that they will need after experimentation, to prevent their feeling of pain and suffering. Also, they can consider when is it a good time to test animals. Testing animals on human toxicity is a waste of experimentation on animals because they will rarely gather accurate data. Finally, medication and outstanding treatment should be given, after performing these tests on them. Following these theories will cause animal testing to be safe and reliable. Animal testing will be improved and people will be more comfortable with the idea of animal testing.

The deadline is too short to read someone else's essay
Hire a verified expert to write you a 100% Plagiarism-Free paper

Cite this page

The Study on Animal Experimentation. (2020, Jan 15). Retrieved from