Animal testing is the practice of testing drugs, cosmetics and theories on animal in order to advance the field. This has been going on for a hundred years and many medical, pharmaceutical and cosmetic products have been created and benefited the human race. If it weren’t for animals we wouldn’t know the causes of heart disease. If it wasn’t for animals, there would be know such thing as the morning after pill. If it weren’t for animals, mascara would still go clumpy!! I believe that the testing of cosmetics of animals is pathetic and that only vain, arrogant people who want to be safe believe in it. On the other hand I believe that the use of animal fur is fine, as the animals do not use the fur when they are dead, and the animals are bred to be killed, like pedigree dogs are bred for shows.
I regard the use of animals for scientific breakthrough acceptable and I do not see the reasoning behind their argument. If the people who argue against the testing on animals have a heart attack, their life saving drug will come from testing on animals, their diagnosis will come from research on animals and their transplant heart will come from a baboon. All these animals helped saved hundreds of lives; their death helps us.
Points of View.
Animal testing, as well as human testing has found out the affects of smoking. Many humans have died from smoking related cancer and many more will do so. If animals aren’t allowed to smoke because it is so harmful and cancer is imminent, why are humans? Surely by now everyone in the world knows smoking kills, yet hundreds of people do. Should I protest for the hundreds of humans forced to smoke? Do they need me to send bombs to the cigarette company owner? Should I go and protest and free them from their life of disease? No, because they want to smoke.
They believe it helps them. If it helps them, why doesn’t it help the monkeys? Maybe smokers have made a breakthrough in science, maybe they’ve worked out a way to not die because of smoking; a way not have a lung capacity of a 6 year old, maybe they’re impervious to the cancer cells; or maybe they are fooling themselves. Maybe they will not wake up one day. Maybe they will spend their last days in a ward surrounded by strangers. The only way to find a cure for cancer is to test animals. If people do not want testing on animals they will be jeopardizing the lives of others. Just make sure the monkeys don’t have to die.
On the subject of the death of animals, I would like to point out that over the decades of animal testing many animals have been killed. Anyone can name these animals, rabbits, cats, dogs, monkeys and so on. All these small, defenseless animals. The only animals that protestors defend are the small furry ones that can be named and you can play with. Why doesn’t anyone protest to prevent testing on fruit flies? Where are the animal rights activists chaining themselves to labs? Where is the splinter groups send mail bombs to the scientists? The reality is that the 1 % of cats and dogs that is tested on are ‘cuter’ than flies. The animals that are tested on the most are rodents, as mice share 60 % of human’s genes, but if monkeys are tested on, much more like humans, there is outcry. Only a few laboratories use monkeys but these are some of the only labs that are brought to attention.
The protestors are so biased they only show the bad points of a small percentage of labs. I have seen the same picture of a rabbit on two websites and in a book, yet the protestors claim this is what goes on in labs around the world. If it happens in many places why aren’t they’re many photos? This is makes them hypocrites as they claim the scientists cover up all the things that the public don’t what to hear. If you took all the literature and all the websites against animal testing and complied all the points against animal testing, and then took all the drugs that have benefited humans, all the breakthroughs in science and all the names of people saved by animal testing people would realize that animal testing is the way forward.
I believe that animals should be tested on; it is not ‘speciesism’, as described by Australian philosopher Peter Singer, but merely means of development of the human race. Is speciesism when you chose chicken over beef at a restaurant? Surely by this you are violating the animal’s ‘rights’. Can they sue you under the animal rights act? If you stand on a bug are you violating his rights as a bug? No, you are not. Animals do not have rights such as humans because they haven’t developed enough mentally. They do not have a society as far as we understand; they only have one thought in their mind, live.
Animals do not live in harmony, they eat each other, and that is the way they will carry on living; if we see a lion killing an antelope would we arrest him for murder? No because he is simply trying to live and help himself develop as a lion, so in that case scientists who test on animals are better than the lions because they kill in order to benefit the human race. If a wild horse kicks a human in the chest and breaks his ribs, does the horse get arrested for assault? If a human broke a horses rib he would be arrested. This is because the horse wasn’t responsible for actions as he is only an animal. So animals are above the law yet they have to have laws protecting them. How pitiable are these animals? They can kill but cannot be killed, they can live anywhere and cannot be deported and they are helped to live by humans.
On the theme of animal rights, are animals entitled to a home, education and other benefits according to their rights? If an animal doesn’t have a job or serve a purpose do they claim benefits from Social Security? Can animals claim asylum if they are under threat? Animals do not have rights, they have no Bill of Rights, and they purely are sub-humans; but laws are passed, such as the Animal Welfare Act, to make sure the animals that are being tested on are not ill-treated. All experiments done on animals have to be approved by an animal care and use committee. All laboratories that test on animals must have a license to prove they have high standards, and are susceptible to inspection at anytime. All these precautions to prevent the mistreatment of animals and the protestors are still campaigning.
Are the protestors campaigning that animals are not killed for food? No. Why not? Is the animal flesh is his or her own and if they do not permit you to eat it then you cannot? Thousands of animals are killed to be eaten. This has happened ever since one squidgy green lump ate another, smaller green lump to benefit himself in the dawn of time. If the protestors don’t like that and think it shouldn’t have happened then they should have never been born. This is has been the way every species has evolved and if they cannot agree with it, they are fooling themselves. There is a food chain and humans are at the top of it for many animals. Humans have evolved and they are the master race on this planet. This isn’t about some poor rabbit being cruelly tested on; it is about survival.
If other species of animals started testing on animals would the protestors stop it or would they marvel at the cleverness of the animal? Indisputably, the animal that was testing on other animals would be tested on. The fear then arises that if the animal that is testing on other animals wants to test on a human what would we do? Of course this situation will never arise, and I will not speculate if and when it will happen if it does. Maybe at the moment animals treat the stories about animal testing as myths and horror stories, or maybe humans are thought of as aliens that abduct animals and test on them and impregnate them. (This does happen) Do animal rights protestors believed that the animals will think badly of us if we carry on testing? Who knows? All I know is that if the testing on animals continues, humans will benefit greatly, and if people do not believe in it they should not be able to benefit from it.