Animal testing has been a controversial issue due to the moral and immoral issues that have to be considered at the moment of practice these sadistic experiments. The use of animals to scientific terms took place in 500 BC in ancient Greece, utilizing them to discover the organ’s functions. However, in ancient Rome and Alexandria, these experiments were practised on criminals, yet years later banned as it was considered mutilation of the human body, using animals instead. Though, it was not just before Queen Victoria demonstrated her disapproval to these experiments during the 19th century that campaigns against animal testing initiated (ProCon, 2019). Although these experiments may be considered unethical and immoral, experts have continued to practice them since they have become the conventional testing form throughout the years; and also because it is more affordable for businesses (Cruelty Free International, n.d). Nonetheless, these are not sufficient reasons to justify this brutal act, and instead, other ways of testing must be implemented to stop the usage of animals and obtain more accurate results.
Firstly, it is important to highlight that there are more accurate alternatives of testing implementing the technological advances that have been developed; furthermore, it is fundamental to estimate the differences in the reactions that animal testing has on humans and animals. Each year, more than 100 million animals are killed only in the United States due to medical researches (PeTA, 2017). Animal testing in medical research is practised to scope the amount of medicine that is absorbed into the blood, the toxicity, the reactions and the time taken for the reaction (FDA, 2019). Nowadays, acknowledge the advancement and the growing of different innovations in science, there are many ways to test the veracity of pharmaceutical products to replace the employment of animals (Cruelty Free International, n.d). Alternative solutions include computer models that replicate human organs and musculoskeletal systems to study biological conditions, 3D simulations of humans cells to demonstrate the possible reactions that antibiotics may have in individuals, and volunteer studies which consists of providing a modest amount of doses of new drugs or treatments to analyse how they affect the humans’ body of those who have terminal illnesses (Cruelty Free International, n.d ). In addition, according to Cruelty Free International, those experiments are more accurate than testing on animals; for example, a scientist can do skin allergy tests with a cell-based procedure demonstrating 90% accuracy, while animal testing is just 72% (n.d). As a result, nowadays the use of animals is unnecessary and it is proof that new techniques can be implemented avoiding animals torture.
Furthermore, animal testing has been utilised to avoid harming humans. However, a considerable amount of animals including mice, dogs, monkeys and rabbits, have suffered severe consequences to the extent of death. They have been forced to inhale toxic gases, to suffer prolonged immobilisation, being burned, as well as deprived of living in their natural environment, which has not only caused them physical damages, but also psychological trauma. This is solely due to cosmetic testing and biological experiments, among others (PeTA, 2017), which results in not having an immediate and painless death, and instead, suffering a slow and painful one. Moreover, Navs explains that cosmetic testing experiments specifically causes of eye and skin irritation, carcinogenicity, and levels of toxicity in animals (n.d). For instance, the most common method to measure toxicity is the Draize rabbit eye test, which helps to identify if the chemical would cause injuries to humans’ eyes (n.d). This process consists of depositing a small amount of the substance in the eyes of at least six rabbits, leaving it for 21 days and recording the reactions, which usually are pain, irritation, dehydration and blindness (Navs, n.d). It is fundamental to highlight that this is just one of the hundreds and cruel tests that innocent animals suffer in laboratories every day.
Opponents may claim that biologically humans and specific animals, which are involved in animal testing, especially mice and monkeys, share the same or similar set of genes. That is why their reactions will, or are supposed to be, the same as humans to diseases and treatments (Blakemore, October 28, 2018). According to Blakemore (2018) to protect human life, unfamiliar medicines and treatments have to be proven before they are implemented and sold. Thus it is better than an animal life is at risk and not human life; to this extent, they maintain that more than be ashamed people should be proud that it is possible to have some responses before humans consume it (2018). However, PeTA states that the virus that is synthetically induced in animals differ to those who occur naturally, so the results and reactions that are shown in animals may be different in humans. For instance, since long time ago scientists discover the cure for cancer and it works in mice, however, when it was tested in humans it did not work. In 2015 even though the HIV and AIDS vaccines were efficient in monkeys, they were not effective in humans, in fact, those who utilized them argue that they made them more exposed to the condition ( PeTA, 2017). As has been demonstrated, animal testing is not accurate due to the biological differences between human and animals and so, hundreds of animals are dying every day for no substantial reasons.
In conclusion, the proponents of animal testing have to consider the innumerable amount of ethical and moral issues that it involves. Furthermore, It is important to consider that animal testing does not have any better results than the technological ones, or even human testing that can be done with volunteers who have a terminal condition. Conversely, it has been demonstrated that both of these has more solid results. To that extent, there are more ways of testing products before they are provided to humans. Also, if animals are like us, as we can utilize them for both medical and cosmetic testing instead of humans, then certainly those animals feel and suffer psychologically and physically damages, and most importantly, they deserve to be treated and protected as we would wish for ourselves.