Animal testing for cosmetics started out in 1933 after a woman became blind and died after using “Lash Lure mascara”.[2] Because of this accident, a federal food, drug, and cosmetic act was passed down to protect the public from hazardous cosmetics. This act became a problem to many large cosmetic organizations and many had no choice but to resort to animal testing. 

Another reason for animal testing would be for medical purposes. This could include research in terminal diseases such as Cancer and AIDS. Throughout the past few decades, many scientists had developed vaccines through animal testing. This includes diseases such as rabies, polio, measles, mumps, rubella and tuberculosis.[3] Many successful surgeries were also due to doctors performing the techniques on animals beforehand as practice.

As a result, many argued that it is only right for doctors and scientists to use animals as test subjects as it is “unethical” to test the drugs on humans. Their argument is simply because “human life has greater intrinsic value than animals”. Moreover, many felt that “since we kill animals to eat them, isn’t medical research a more honorable death for the animals?”

On the other hand, another group of people including a famous philosopher, Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) retaliated by saying that “just because animals are unable to reason and express their feeling doesn’t means they cannot feel pain and suffering”.[4] This group felt that the animals share the same rights as humans do and deaths through medical or commercial research are no different from murder.

We therefore reflect whether is it really right for us to make use of the lives of animals for our own gains. We are aware that animal testing is cruel towards animals, but if they don’t do it, who will? Although the drugs and surgery could save our lives, but in return, it takes away the life of the animal.

Is it fair to the animals if animal testing is allowed? On the other hand, is it fair to humans if animal testing is disallowed? If animal testing is allowed, it will be unfair to the animals. These animals will have to undergo experiments, forced feeding of drugs and even death against their will. But it will be fair to humans as we will benefit from the medical advances and (probably) live longer. Then again, if animal testing were to be disallowed, many people would suffer from product poisoning, long-term illnesses and perhaps die from a mistake made during surgery.

As mentioned previously, animals are unable to express their feelings and thoughts verbally to us and because of that, we assume that these animals do not feel pain and sufferings. But biologically, the body of an animal also consist of nerves and muscle tissues. This means that they do feel pain every time they receive an injection or undergo a surgery. But just because we cannot understand them, we decide to put their fate into our hands, and that is violating the rights of the animals. Are we abusing our rights to enforce death on these animals? That being said, we also have human rights to choose to receive drugs tested on animals to stay healthy.

Can you imagine if one day, ALIENS of high intelligence invades earth??

We don't speak the same language.

We are less intelligent than them.

DOESN'T THAT MAKE US ANIMALS??????

So does this give the aliens the right to mistreat us and use us as test subjects??

I believe that organizations are taking up responsibility and playing their part to protect the public by testing it before hand. In addition, doctors and scientists are working hard to develop a cure for terminal diseases. This heroism value of theirs gives hope to victims worldwide with the illnesses. However, if animal testing is disallowed, we will be more humane towards animals. We will also learn to be more caution and careful with what we buy. Because of our tactful behavior, we will also learn how to treasure and value our own life.

Should animal testing be allowed, thousands of lives would be saved. Vaccines and antibiotic drugs can be developed to counter diseases such as rabies and mumps. As a result, there will be more people left on the planet to contribute to the society. Conversely, if it is disallowed, there would be huge cost savings to animal testing. The government can then put this money to good use (hopefully).


I believe that animal testing is cruel and that there are plenty of alternatives to test drugs. An example of an alternative could be to use pieces of left over human skin that is removed during surgery to measure chemical reaction to the skin. This method is harmless and more useful as it uses real human skin. The probability of yielding an accurate result is higher than of an animal. Another method would be to use technology and software to do research.[5] These are good alternatives to reduce the use of animal testing without changing the results and harming animals.


What do you think?

I know this is lame and stuff, but here are the citations =P

[1] BBC. (2011). BBC - Ethics - Animal ethics: Experimenting on animals. BBC - Homepage. Retrieved December 1, 2011, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/animals/using/experiments_1.shtml

[2] Council Of The National Academies. (2004). Science, Medicine, and Animals. The National Academies Press. Retrieved December 1, 2011, from http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10733&page=21

[3] Port. (2004). Animal Testing : Facts and Figures . Animal Information - Animal Facts and Wild Animal Pictures. Retrieved December 1, 2011, from
http://www.animalport.com/animal-testing/animal-testing-facts-figures.html

[4] Andre, C., & Velasquez, M. (2010). Animal Testing and Ethics. Santa Clara University - Welcome. Retrieved December 1, 2011, from http://ww.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v1n3/cures.html

[5] Alternatives: Testing Without Torture | PETA.org. (2011). People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA): The animal rights organization | PETA.org. Retrieved December 1, 2011, from
http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/alternatives-testing-without-torture.aspx