...Burgos B. Javier. “Animal Experimentation Is Unscientific”. At Issue: Animal Experimentation. Ed. David M. Haugen. San Diego: Greenhaven, 2000. 51-54. Print. Javier Burgos is the president of The Nature of Wellness and graduate of Barcelona University. The Nature of Wellness is an organization that informs the public about both medical and scientific flaws in animal testing. Throughout this article he informs the reader of the faults in the tests that scientist conduct on animals. This article will aide me in proving my premise that animal testing often produces invalid results. When the other states, “The pseudo-scientific belief that human medicine can be based on veterinary medicine has led the biomedical establishment to engage in...
Words: 1858 - Pages: 8
...Animal Testing Horrifying images come to mind when people discuss animal testing: mutations, glow-in-the-dark hair, and death. Since the debate began, those who oppose animal testing often propose alternative methods to replace animals. Activists suggest methods such as in vitro or computer programs. Regardless of these new advances, persisting facts endure proving animals to be useful in multiple scenarios, and animal testing to be ethical despite common belief. Animal testing has proved its usefulness in the past century in numerous ways. Credit is due to animals for the treatment to diabetes, organ transplants, and the polio vaccination (Myers). In fact, the past century attributes every stride in medical advancement to animal experimentation....
Words: 741 - Pages: 3
...care/do anything. - The only outcome will be the likely outcome of losing your job o You may be loyal to the company to point out flaws, but it will not matter o Losing your job will also lower the loyalty for your family, since you chose the company over the family. o Company-co-worker loyalty. They are different, where co-workers may get laid-off because of the whistle-blow (your actions seem disloyal to them), and company is exposed (your actions to them seem loyal) Keep it in the ‘family’, so no involvement of the outside - Deontological Look at the pros and cons Is there a breach of loyalty? Are your intentions rights? The question is do you really have a responsibility to... anything? - Employees don’t need to have responsibility for the company, for society as a whole. Whistle-blowing will not cause beneficial outcomes in business. The business will have to change, which they will not want. The blower will be exposed. So why whistle-blow? Whistle-blowing gets in the way of your self-interest, since it will cause nothing but negativity to you. So why? Because of loyalty - Is loyalty a bad thing to have? PRODUCT SAFETY No product is allowed to be marketed before it is deemed safe. Testing on animals is used to test their product - Animal rights activists usually depict animals in a happy, Disney fashion, which is untrue Animals don’t feel pain. - Pain is a mental phenomenon (body parts don’t feel pain; the mind does) o What if no pain is felt? Should...
Words: 349 - Pages: 2
...topic. o Animal experimentation o Outsourcing o Media violence • Answer the following questions in paragraphs of approximately 100 words demonstrating your critical and creative thinking skills. 1. Identify if the topic you chose, as presented by both articles, is a problem or an issue and explain what makes it a problem or an issue. If you believe the articles present both problems and issues, identify and explain what the problems are and what the issues are. The problem is, in order to have medication which is safe for human consumption, it needs to be tested. When the testing needed is based on the use of animals, it becomes an issue because many individuals believe that the research is implacable, barbarous, expensive, and erroneous. It is also argued that it is not necessary and that more emphasis should be put on medical prevention. Supporters of animal research believe that we would not have the medical advances in treatment and medication that we do, were it not for the experiments done on animals and that it is key to preventing disease, . 2. Were the problems or issues expressed effectively? Describe how the problems or issues were or were not best expressed. I believe that both articles effectively expressed the reasons for and against animal experiments for medical purposes. Animal Experimentation Is Vital for Medical Research explains the role which animal research plays in the medical field and focuses on the counterargument of animal rights activists...
Words: 1876 - Pages: 8
... 24th February 2014 Bridge Street, Westminster, London, SW1A OAA Dear David Heyes, I am writing to you concerning the ever growing issue of animal testing and vivisection. For hundreds of years animals have been tampered with and killed for one reason alone - to satisfy our medicinal tenacities. Over 600,000 animals have been used this year alone; this figure is astounding and utterly shocking! These vulnerable, exposed creatures languish in pain everyday of their lives. Can you imagine living like this? After reading an article by Peter Tatchell, a human rights campaigner, it has intrigued and inspired me to make people aware of this urgent subject. I hope, after reading what I have to say, you will raise this issue in Parliament. As humans, how can we treat another being so horrendously? The pain that is inflicted on these un-consenting animals is the basis of my enmity towards it. Vivisection must stop! As Tatchell suggests, we MUST find a plausible humane replacement. Too many people, it comes as a surprise that the number of invasive medical experiments involving animals has continuously increased since modern records began in...
Words: 954 - Pages: 4
...Reserve Readings link in the Week Five section of your student Web site. • Select one of the following topics and read both articles that present opposing sides of the argument surrounding that topic. o Animal experimentation o Outsourcing o Media violence • Answer the following questions in paragraphs of approximately 100 words demonstrating your critical and creative thinking skills. 1. Identify if the topic you chose—as presented by both articles—is a problem or an issue, and explain what makes it a problem or an issue. If you believe the articles present both problems and issues, identify and explain what the problems are and what the issues are. Iii It is an issue because they have different opinion about it. The issues are that no one benefits and it is needless, costly, unreliable, and sometimes misleading research investigation and experiments. It is express that financially it is a waste and financial resources should allocate the monies to do clinical, preventive medicine, health programs and other studies. It is also believed that animal research does not have a sufficient role in improving people’s lives. Medical researchers believe that they are improving people’s lives, without the use of animal experimentation such as; AIDS, penicillin, anesthetics, and the human blood type were done through medical research. 2. Were the problems or issues expressed effectively? Describe how the problems or issues...
Words: 1738 - Pages: 7
... “Animal Experimentation” Every year millions of animals in the US are used for scientific and commercial experiments in order to create treatments and determine the safety of products or medications for human uses. The community must face the reality that the well being of animals must be sacrificed in order to successfully cure humanities’ diseases and prevent as many deaths as possible. Since there are many similarities within humans and animals, society was able to deepen understanding of the human body by continuously studying and experimenting on animals. For example, animal researchers have recently found a method to restore people’s visions using safe procedures after conducting several experiments on monkey and mice. However, people who are against the idea of animal experimentation argue that experimenting on them is inhumane and can be replaced animal experimentations by many other methods. Besides, those who opposes the idea would state that researchers are willing to allow animals to go through pain and suffering in order to protect humanity from the physical pain since the human race is selfish in general because society is only care focused on caring for the need and safely of themselves. Evidently, Aysha Akhtar is a neurologist and a public health specialist who brings up her experience at a neuroscience conference where a presenter shows a brief video clip of his animal experimentation, showing how gruesome the presenter was treating the animal. Therefore...
Words: 2974 - Pages: 12
...ANIMAL PROCEDURES COMMITTEE REVIEW OF COST-BENEFIT ASSESSMENT IN THE USE OF ANIMALS IN RESEARCH JUNE 2003 REPORT OF THE COST-BENEFIT WORKING GROUP OF THE ANIMAL PROCEDURES COMMITTEE PREFACE Letter to the Minister from Michael Banner, Chair of the Animal Procedures Committee 17 June 2003 Dear Ms Flint ANIMAL PROCEDURES COMMITTEE: RECOMMENDATIONS ON COST-BENEFIT ASSESSMENT UNDER THE ANIMALS (SCIENTIFIC PROCEDURES) ACT 1986 On behalf of the Animal Procedures Committee I enclose the Committee’s report on cost-benefit assessment. In it we address the adequacy of the current cost-benefit assessment performed in the course of evaluating project licence applications. We have sought to look at the many issues which arise in relation to this important element of the regulation of the use of animals, but would draw attention to three particular aspects of our work. In the first place we have addressed the fundamental question as to scientific validity of the use of animals. We believe that our considerations and conclusions offer an important clarification of the debate and fulfil the request made by your predecessor, Mike O’Brien, to provide advice on this issue. Secondly, while we conclude that some uses of animals may yield scientific knowledge, we argue that this does not settle the question of justification. We go on to elucidate the full range of factors which must be considered for there to be a rigorous application of the cost-benefit assessment. Thirdly, we also consider how...
Words: 56267 - Pages: 226
...Humans have used animals for different uses. They have been used for food, clothing farm work and a variety of other uses. So using them to test new medical advances is different. Animal testing for medical purpose help saves lives and future generations. Animal testing should be continued for the use within the medical field. The ancient Greeks believed that animals were created by the gods to be used however people wish. The Bible says God gave man dominions “over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping things that creeps on the earth” (Genesis 9:1-3). The ancient Greeks and Romans influenced the laws of western civilization. The western civilization had no laws saying what you could not do to an animal no matter how cruel or unnecessary the act was (Thorburn). To some people animals have no rights at all while to others animals have rights and should not fell unnecessary pain and suffering. The people who believe animals have no rights; and use them just for their benefits but there is a line that should not be crossed animals do have feelings and some rights. The new movement of animal right groups has some good points like human like primates should not be used in testing like chimpanzees. The first law put in place by western civilizations was in the Massachusetts Bay colony. The law states that it is illegal to exercise any tyranny or cruelty towards any animal which are kept for use by humans...
Words: 1491 - Pages: 6
...Animal Cruelty Liz Rasey English 112 Humans have been using animals for consumption ever since we have been around on the Earth. As the populations of humans rapidly increases throughout many centuries so has the consumption levels. Just within the last few decades has the awareness for animal rights gained tons of popularity. PETA (People for Ethical Treatment of Animals) was created in 1980 and “Focuses its attention on the four areas in which the largest numbers of animals suffer the most intensely for the longest periods of time: on factory farms, in the clothing trade, in laboratories, and in the entertainment industry.” ([->0]) As the knowledge of animal cruelty becomes more popular , will people take action to ensure the lives of animals are protected against the way they are enslaved for food purposes? Animal rights activists and animal welfare organizations have slightly different beliefs and will both be discussed vs. people for animal experimentation and for food productions . Animal rights activists believe that “the rights to humane treatment claimed on behalf of animals, especially the right not to be exploited for human purposes” (The American Heritage Dictionary 2005). They also believe that humans and animals should have the same rights. The three major types of foods used for food consumption are the chickens, pigs and the cows. But there are definitely many others. “Every year in the United States over nine billion chickens...
Words: 1018 - Pages: 5
...face and listen. These dangers and reproaches are coming from activists who oppose animal experimentations done by the researchers. However, the researchers consider the experimentations are necessary in order to produce credible results and safe products, and it cannot be replaced or eliminated. Thus, some scientists believe that they should inform the public about the importance of animal testing to gain public advocacy. However, other scientists worry about this idea since the media can bring adverse result. Many scientists who speak in public about their work have suffered from activist intimidation and violence. For example, Colin Blakemore, neurobiologist at the University of Oxford, and his family suffered from terrorists after defending his animal research in public. Also, the University of Cambridge had to abandon its project in 2004 with the loss of local support due to the constant harassment of staff and members by animal activists. However, despite the insults and threats, some scientists believe that they should speak out about their research involving animal testing. They have organized or joined the group called Pro-Test to correct the misinformation put out by animal-right groups, and to tell the benefits of animal testing. As a result of their rally in 2006, Pro-Test have gained considerable public and media attention. In the same year, BBC broadcasted the documentary about animal research called “Monkeys, Rats and ME”. Furthermore, with the support and security...
Words: 347 - Pages: 2
...Animal testing is use of animals in experimental ways for the benefit of biomedical research, and it has been a topic long argued about. To every argument, there are two sides: The American Medical Association (AMA) and the People for the Ethical Treatment of Humans (PETA). AMA’s opinion on the topic states that animal testing is necessary, while PETA highly discriminates it. These two major groups of people have been “at war” with each other on this topic of animal testing in biomedical research for decades. The AMA has recently published an article on this topic titled “Use of Animals in Biomedical Research.” AMA’s argument in this article is effective, they use persuasive techniques to support their claim, and their evidence is clear; however, the author fails to make some of his counterarguments convincing. AMA’s claim convinces you that animal testing is needed for biomedical research in many different, but persuasive ways. For example, they express that without all of the information gathered from animal testing, either man kind will be tested on, or we wouldn’t have the health benefits and treatments for diseases that we have today. In this statement, the author uses appeal to fear, by stating that humans everywhere will pay the price in terms of human pain and suffering, thus increasing fear and prejudice towards the audience. Another way the author uses persuasive techniques to support the claim, is by saying that there are limitations to the use of human subjects such...
Words: 670 - Pages: 3
...Position Paper – The Pros and Cons of Animal Experimentation The Pros and Cons of Animal Experimentation Animal research has had a major role in many scientific and medical advances. It has both its advantages and disadvantages. “Moreover,” animal experimentation is an extremely controversial subject that has divided people into a group that either support animal testing or oppose it all together, and another that advocates the use of alternatives. There are many pros and cons when it comes to this subject. People all over the world have different opinions on weather animal lab testing is humane and necessary. Animal experimentation is unethical due to the practice of animal torture and suffering, animal choice and death of these animals. Animal experimentation (noun): any type of experiment performed on living animals, especially in order to test the effects of chemical compounds such as new drugs, cosmetics, food additives and pesticides (Animal experimentation, 2001). All over the world, people think differently on whether animal experimentation is an appropriate way to test medicines and products. Each year in the United States, an estimated 70 million animals are maimed, blinded, scalded, force-fed chemicals, genetically manipulated, and otherwise hurt and killed in the name of science, by private institutions, household product and cosmetics companies, government agencies, educational institutions, and scientific centers. Substances we use every day, such...
Words: 1471 - Pages: 6
...Essay Animal Testing Twenty million animals are killed annually as a result of animal testing. Approximately fifteen million of these deaths can be attributed to medical research. The belief that animal testing is necessary in the development of medical treatments, prescription drugs, cures and vaccines, is a common misconception; test results are often inaccurate therefore using animals for medical testing is not only cruel to the animals but it’s also dangerous for humans. There are a rising number of scientists, doctors and healthcare professionals who are extremely opposed to medical testing on animals. It is believed among this group that results obtained from animal experiments cannot be safely applied to humans because 83% of substances are metabolized differently by animals than humans. Records show that less than 2% of illnesses found in humans exist in the animal kingdom; that is until scientists put them there. Most drugs available today were originally tested on animals; however, four out of ten patients who take prescription drugs will suffer from severe side effects. Over two million people are hospitalized annually because of prescription drug side effects and hundreds of thousands die. There are also the many prescription drugs that are recalled after they’ve been on the market for several years; this is a direct result of inadequate testing before FDA approval. Pharmaceutical companies claim to have positive results from animal testing; however...
Words: 271 - Pages: 2
...through this deadly experiment, people would be in shock. Instead, scientists are testing whether or not swallowing shampoo would affect a cat. Testing on animals is a very disagreeable process that should not be allowed. Animal testing started a number of years ago to help provide humans with information. The process of animal testing is one of the most disturbing experiments ever done. Many cosmetics and personal care products are made every year and are put into the market after being tested on animals. Almost every product has been animal tested at some stage in its development. The website titled "Animals in Product Testing" stated, "...these products have gone through a long and complex testing process that leaves millions of animals mutilated, burned, poisoned and gassed in outmoded and unnecessary tests." From these different experiments, animals are often left with different diseases like Syphilis, herpes, or AIDS. Manufacturers of these different products say that they are performing these tests to assure our safety for these products. They want to make sure that humans are not in any amount of danger. Why do companies even agree with animal experimentation? Some companies, like Clairol, demand that they do not use animal testing on their shampoo product. Even though they have cut down on animal testing, they have not eliminated the complete line of cosmetics and other products of animal...
Words: 1904 - Pages: 8
