Abstract
The argument that animal testing is an act of cruelty against a species or species that cannot protest its supposedly pitiless treatment is a denial of the overall benefits that result from concentrated research on a living organism. It is through such research that many significant medical achievements have been made over the past hundred years. This paper shall address these achievements and argue that they would never have been accomplished were it not for the unhindered use of animals as test subjects during the research phase.

Tags:animal, testing, benefits

Abstract
An opinion paper that discusses current debates on animal testing, problems with animal testing, alternatives and how regulation can be improved.

From the Paper
"Animal testing has become a hot topic in the last few decades as more and more animal rights & awareness issues have entered the world stage. From a variety of backgrounds, groups have rallied to the cause of animals around the world that are involved in drug testing, cosmetic testing, and a number of different experimental situations. The most hotly contested issue has been drug testing, where the development of potentially human life-saving substances is weighed against the life of these animals. Recent scientific research has been working hard to increase the accuracy and usage of alternative testing methods."

Tags:animal, pets, rights, controversial, drug, human, benefit, experiment, scient, cosmetic

Abstract
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."

Tags:vivisection, adverse-reactions, drugs, human-tissue, legislation

Abstract
This paper advocates the benefits gained from using animals in medical and scientific testing. The paper points out that while, ideally, it would be better to not use animals, the benefits outweigh the costs. The paper outlines the contribution animal testing has made so far to the medical profession and why there is a need for animal testing at all. The paper then offers some alternatives to animal testing which should be used wherever possible.

From the Paper
"Animal research has been vital for medical advances in the past ("Today's Research for Tomorrow's Medical Advances"). For example, it has helped provide antibiotics and vaccines, insulin for diabetes, treatments for leukemia, local and general anesthetics, anticoagulants, heart valve replacements, and has made possible advances in medical technology such as blood transfusion, kidney dialysis, and the heart lung machine. See Figure 1 on the following page for a complete list of the contributions animal testing has made to developing vaccines, medicines, surgery enhancements and medical technology."

Tags:medical, research, pigs, genes, science

Abstract
The paper presents the argument that using animal models for human therapeutic experiments is inappropriate, unethical and unreliable. The paper looks at the evidence that animal models have not only been faulty indicators but they have caused much delay in the development of drugs to combat HIV and have proved dangerous and contradictory in the research for anti cancer drugs. The paper contends that the rapid development of toxicogenomics has allowed for alternative, cheaper and more accurate toxicology studies, and so it is high time that this cruel practice of vivisection is totally banned from pharmaceutical research.


Outline:

Thesis
Introduction
Animal Testing: A Review
Animal Testing: Barrier to Drug Development
New Testing Methods
Conclusion

From the Paper
"A recent comprehensive review of animal and corresponding human tests has clearly revealed vast differences in responses between animals and humans to particular drugs. This review published by the journal of 'Alternatives to Animal Testing and Experimentation' (AATEX) that analyzed 20 animal and human studies reported only 2 cases where animal studies proved to be consistent with the human studies. [Andrew Knight, 2007] Another recent British study compared the treatment effects between animal models and human clinical trials for six different medical conditions. Out of these, only 2 animal studies had concordant results with Human clinical trials. Furthermore 2 of the studies had totally contradictory effects than indicated in the animal studies. [Pablo Perel et.al (, 2007)] Hence the validity of using animal models as an indicator for human outcomes stands largely mistaken.
"One standing example of the dangers of relying on animal models for drug testing is the case of the drug Vioxx manufactured by Merck Laboratories. More than 80 million people worldwide used this drug in the treatment of arthritis. However, the drug which was found to have "heart protective effect" among mice proved to be carrying a high risk for causing heart attacks among humans. As Dr. John J. Pippin, M.D and chief advisor to the FDA stated, "the Vioxx animal testing debacle is not unique. Over the years, millions of patients have been exposed to harmful drugs, such as Rezulin and Baycol, that seemed safe in tests on mice, dogs, rats, monkeys, horses, and other animals." [ PCRM]"

Tags:toxicogenomics, vivisection, drugs, morals

Abstract
This paper covers the history of the modern animal rights movement and examines and evaluates the current federal legislation regarding all aspects of animal testing and treatment of laboratory animals. Individual animal tests and alternatives to using laboratory animals are discussed from different viewpoints. Reasons for either supporting or condemning many different types of animal tests in the areas of medicine, cosmetics and scientific research are looked at.

From the Paper
This paper covers the history of the modern animal rights movement and examines and evaluates the current federal legislation regarding all aspects of animal testing and treatment of laboratory animals. Individual animal tests and alternatives to using laboratory animals are discussed from different viewpoints. Reasons for either supporting or condemning many different types of animal tests in the areas of medicine, cosmetics and scientific research are looked at.

Tags:act, alternatives, birds, chimps, cosmetics, dogs, experiments, laboratory, medicine, mice, rabbits, rats, science, welfare

Abstract
This paper examines how animal testing is growing day by day and how animal welfare trusts are fighting to ensure the safety of animals against this cruel act. It puts forward the argument that animal testing is indeed wrong and unjust and how it should be banned, as far as the testing of cosmetics, personal care, and household products are concerned. It also discusses how it should be restricted to life-saving research only, when no alternatives are available.

From the Paper
"Animal testing exerts innocent animals to discomfort, species extrapolation problems and death. Often animals that have been tested upon are not even given anesthesia to alleviate their pain mainly because many scientists believe that anesthesia would interfere with the test's result. Even though alternatives to animal testing are widely available, there are still many companies that practice this hideous act upon animals."

Tags:cosmetics, medication, welfare

Abstract
This paper examines how animal testing is still alive and well in many parts of the United States. It discusses which animals are tested on more frequently and in what forms. The paper comes up with concrete suggestions for better implementation of the Animal Welfare Act which could stop much of the testing.

From the Paper
"Cosmetics are not required to be tested on animals and since non-animal alternatives exist, it's hard to understand why some companies still continue to conduct these tests. Cosmetic companies kill millions of animals every year to try to make a profit. According to the companies that perform these tests, they are done to establish the safety of a product and the ingredients. However, the Food and Drug Administration which regulates cosmetic products, does not require animal testing (Peta)."

Tags:act, welfare, suffer, legislation, law, cosmetic, research

Abstract
This paper studies the arguments raised both against and in support of animal testing. It is believed that animals are subjected to cruelty during researches but medical science feels it would absolutely unwise to ban animal testing altogether as it would hinder the progress being made in different branches. It is therefore important to study the subject of animal experimentation in order to find out which group has more valid arguments in support of their stance.

From the Paper
"Animal testing is the most commonly used method in not only medical research but also all other kind of scientific research, which has resulted in worldwide protests. It is believed that since many animals are subjected to cruelty during the research, it is an unethical practice, which must be banned. Even animal testing for cosmetic products has also been widely condemned. "According to a 1994 study of the Tufts University Center for Animals and Public Policy, as many as 50 million or more animals were used each year in American medical research before 1970. Because of the growing influence of animal protection groups, this number had declined to an estimated 20 million animals in 1992."" (http://www.tufts.edu/vet/cfa/index.html)

Tags:cosmetic, companies, cruelty, experimentation, scientist, research, disease, health, medical, benefits

Abstract
This paper discusses the ongoing debate in society regarding animal testing. The author examines the guidelines for experimentation on animals, modern methods, and discusses the pros and cons of experimenting on animals for human benefit.

From the Paper
"Are the ways that science researches with animals to find cures to today's problems ethical, or is it simply an excuse for animal cruelty? Animal testing is a crucial part of finding cures to diseases and other problems that plague today's society. Animals have been the subjects of tests since the early eighteen hundreds in order to try to find cures to common problems back then. Humans test all kinds of products on animals no matter how it harms the animals. There are valid reasons for testing some products on animals. However, I think that some of the methods used are unethical. Is maliciously harming an animal ethical if it helps the human race?"

Tags:business, paper, rights, society, laboratory