Animal Testing and Inhumane Treatment

Paper Summary:

This paper argues that people might talk about the benefits of animal testing but it is established that animal testing can delay the production of drugs, which would be beneficial to the humans, because they expressed adverse reactions in the animals. The author suggests that there are other alternatives to animal testing including test tube experimentation of human tissue cultures. The paper states that, even though it is difficult to measure the degree of pain and stress caused animals through this inhumane treatment of animals, which no legislation can prevent, this use of animals is immoral and unethical.

Table of Contents
Animal Testing - The Cons
Animal Testing - The Pros
Conclusion

From the Paper:

"Moreover, vivisection does not guarantee the accuracy of the treatment as human diseases differ from animal diseases and the result can be very misleading at times. Further the therapy of the drug differs depending on the species that it is used upon. Therefore a drug might have beneficial effects on a monkey but it could have adverse effects on a human. Belladonna is harmless to rabbits but can kill a human. More examples like these are seen throughout history and one was seen in England where Opren, an anti-rheumatic drug, caused the death of over 70 people and put over 3000 people into critical conditions."

More papers on Animal Testing and Inhumane Treatment:

• Argumentative Essay # 26426 : "Animal Testing in Medical Research"
• Argumentative Essay # 115674 : "Animal Testing and Experimentation"
• Argumentative Essay # 10223 : "New Developments in an Old Argument: Animal Testing"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: