The beating of a heart of is no different from a human being to a wild animal. We think, we feel, and we see, we all have a life. An animal poked, prodded, and abused is no different from a person being mishandled. Happiness and sadness are two major emotions both animal and human both experience, weather we were born in a jungle or a hospital. The Department of Agriculture has approved the importation of 37 marmosets for experiments in laboratories. We don't know precisely what's in store for these creatures but you can be sure it's likely to be something that turns your stomach. Sydney University in recent years used marmosets in experiments in which their eyes were removed for testing and the animals were put down. About 92% of experimental …show more content…
Although some people claim that animal testing is one of the best and most accurate ways to find cures to diseases on humans. However, there are many reports of failed experiments that either worked in the animal and not in humans or did not work at all. For example, Researchers at McMaster University confirms that, “about 95 percent of experimental drugs deemed safe and effective in tests on animals fail in human trials because they don’t work or turn out to be dangerous.” This study proves that in the process of animal testing the drug may seem successful in animals but it may work totally different in a human's body, in a way that might hurt the person but scientists do not see that in the animal testing. In his article, “Animal Testing is Outdated, Imperfect” Ryan Ballinger points out that, “Some medicine that is tested on animals may harm them but help us.This can be misleading and cloud our ability to find a cure for a disease. For example, aspirin is dangerous to some animals, but it helps relieve headaches in humans and provides other benefits.” The essence of Ryan's argument is that if we were to test some the most common medicines that people use today on animals and it came out with a negative affect, we may have never found several of the medicines humans use that result in a good outcome. Julie Radcliff, a San Diego resident writes, "I have a hard …show more content…
While it is often debated that every lab counts, that they are always discovering new information on how to cure diseases everyday. Despite this idea, not every experiment saves a life or finds a cure, some are fatal and go wrong. There is not always a point in testing if you know you are not going to solve something while doing damage at the same time. For instance, Ryan Ballinger a student at Indiana State University reports, “I say any kind of animal testing is wrong because we have so many new inventions now. Why can't one of those inventions help us test products without using animals?” In making this comment, Ballinger is arguing that there is no need for animal testing when we are living in the 21st century and have all these inventions that could do that work instead of putting it all on animals. Ryan also points out that, “We also do not know how these medicines could affect us because some medicines affect us in different ways than animals.” What Ballinger is trying to explain is that this leads to wastefulness when we do not know if it is even going to work on humans in the first place, they are also putting lives in danger testing drugs that worked on animals but do not know the effect of humans. Lastly, a former National Cancer Institute Director Richard Klausner adds, “animal models often fail to provide good ways to mimic disease or predict how drugs