Animals For Medical Research example essay topic

One of the questions facing society today is whether animals should be used in scientific experimentation. In the middle of this controversy, many ideas about nature, primarily animals, are formed. Each side has different arguments, each one posing questions on the place of humans with respect to animals and the rest of the natural world. The history of the benefits of animal research is marked by dramatic breakthroughs. Working with animals in research is vital to continue medical progress.

There is a great deal of controversy surrounding animal research today. One example of such controversy is animal rights activists saying that animals have the capacity to suffer. Another example is animals can't control their own behavior and humans can, so humans shouldn't harm the life of animals. Animal rights activist also say that animal research is deliberate and therefore cruel.

Lastly animal rights activists believe discrimination against other life forms, because they are members of different species, is parallel to discrimination against humans on the grounds of race, gender or religion, and therefore is immoral. On top of this there are many things that we would not have if it weren't for animal testing. Animal rights activists say that animals have the capacity to suffer and therefore should not be tested on; however, this is not a logical argument. It does not work because most animals experience little or no pain at all in nearly all medical research.

Approximately ninety four percent of medical research either does not involve pain or uses anesthesia (Leahy). However, about six percent of research involves some pain to the animal, primarily in the area of pain research itself. Pain is a significant medical problem and work continues into drugs and treatments to help alleviate the effects of arthritis, headaches, cancer, and angina. While the ability of animals to suffer may not be a good reason to stop using animals in medical research, it is a good reason for taking all the measures we can to ensure that they undergo as little discomfort or suffering as possible.

Also the same methods that are painful to animals have also improved the lives of countless animals. More than eighty medicines and vaccines developed for humans are now used to heal pets, farm animals, and wildlife (Miller). Pets, livestock, and animals in zoos live longer, more comfortable, and healthier lives as a result of animal research. Animal research has been essential to the preservation of many endangered species. We recognize that humans are probably unique in their ability to define abstract ideas like right and wrong and then to recognize when our actions fall into either category. The trouble of course, arises, when two or more people try to agree on whether something is actually right or wrong.

Is killing animals right or wrong? Humans regularly kill animals, mostly for food. It is true that humans can survive on a vegetarian or even vegan diet. Does this mean that not eating animals is more moral than eating them, humans must be vegetarian simply because they have the choice, or to put it another way, humans have no choice. All other animals that kill do so for their own benefit. Humans are a very special kind of animal, but we cannot deny our animal origins.

Sometimes it is necessary to kill animals for medical research as well. This is no less essential to us than killing animals for food. Animals in labs are euthanized humanely using guidelines set by the American Veterinary Medical Association. The majority of animals must be euthanized to obtain tissue samples for evaluation and for use in vitro tests (Motavalli). If there is no other option to finding cures for unpleasant illnesses than by using animals in research, then why should humans deny themselves this benefit? For animals, the matter is even clearer.

If I am driving in my car, and a dog and a child run out in front of me, and I have the option of hitting either one of them, but not missing both, which one do I run over? No matter what your feelings on animal rights, in this situation no one could choose to run over the child to save the dog. We do rank the importance of animal and human life on a scale, with human life near the top and animal life further down. Cruelty is a charge that is often leveled against animal researchers, probably because of what they do in these circumstances. Cruelty implies an action that causes physical or mental pain, to no good intent.

But this is not so with animal research. Firstly, most animal research causes no pain. Secondly, and more importantly, medical research intends to discover something of benefit to people and possibly animals. There are several moral arguments for the use of animals in medical research. Humans are the only animals capable of doing something about disease or disaster, and therefore we should do so even if this means using animals.

In addition to this, researchers take good care of the animals they are testing. Animal testing is one of the most regulated aspects of medical research. There are actually a number of safeguards in place that govern the care and treatment of laboratory animals. One of these safeguards is the Animal Welfare Act (Zurlo). This federal law contains the standards for all aspects of care and experimentation on laboratory animals, from feeding to ventilation, to provisions for the use of anesthesia for the possibly painful procedures. Each institution also is ordered to have an animal care and use committee, which has at least one member from outside the institution.

Scientists are concerned about their research animals, both for humane reasons and because healthy test animals are necessary for valid research results. Stressed animals don't yield reliable data. That is why researchers are constantly looking for ways to provide enrichment for animals and their care. This can be something as simple as a food supplement or toys, or it could mean changing their environment for animals to socialize. There are certain types of discrimination that have been outlawed in our society. This is because to tolerate these kinds of discrimination leads to social unrest and possibly the break down of a human society which is founded on a high level of mutual co-operation.

Examples of this are discrimination on the grounds of race or gender. However, there are other types of discrimination that are quite legitimate. If I spot my little brother being hit by another child who is older and bigger in the street, nobody would think any the worse of me for stepping in, stopping the fight, tending my brother's bruises and sending the other child away. This is discrimination against the other child in favor of my brother, but few would disagree with what I did. There is another aspect of this as well. Those members of human society who have been discriminated against in the past could recognize that discrimination, and organize rebellion against it.

Animals simply cannot do this. This does not mean that we should be permitted to treat animals in a cruel or irresponsible way, simply that they do not have the same claims on us as people do. Deliberately there is a clear intention to use the animals in experiments and that ultimately this will result in the animals' deaths. In addition to all this, without animal testing we wouldn't have some of the most common medical procedures that we have today. For instance polio would kill or cripple thousands of un vaccinated people every year, most of the nations insulin dependant diabetics would be dead, and six million Americans would risk death from heat attack, stroke or kidney failure from lack of medication to control their high blood pressure (Goldstein). Also doctors would have no chemotherapy to save seventy percent of children who now survive leukemia, more than one million Americans would lose sight in one eye because cataract surgery would be impossible, and 7,500 newborns that contract jaundice each year would develop cerebral palsy, which is now preventable through photo therapy (Rosenthal, Merchlinsky, Kleppinger).

Furthermore, there would be no kidney dialysis to extend the lives of thousands of patients with end-stage renal disease, surgery of any type would be a painful rare procedure without the development of modern anesthesia allowing artificially induced unconsciousness or local or general insensitivity to pain, and smallpox would go uncontrolled and many others would join the two million people already killed by the disease (Leahy). Lastly, millions of animal would have died from anthrax, distemper, canine parvovirus, feline leukemia, rabies and two hundred other diseases now preventable thanks to animal research (Goldstein). In conclusion, animal testing is very necessary because other means of testing cannot give us a definite estimation as to how substances will interact with complex organisms and has had a positive effect on society. The positive aspects of animal testing far outweigh the negative. There are so many things that we would not be able to use, which are now some of the most common procedures in modern medicine. During testing animals are treated with care and only endure little or no suffering.

There is too much controversy over something that we benefit from.

Bibliography

Page Miller, Sarah Rose A. "Animal Research". The Humanist vs. 61 no 5 (Sept. /Oct. 2001) p.
15-17. Rosenthal, Steven R. ; Merchlinsky, Michael. Kleppinger, Cynthia. "Developing new smallpox vaccines". Emerging Infectious Diseases vs. 7 no 6 (Nov. /Dec. 2001) p.
920-6. Goldstein, Bernard D. "Animal studies and cancer risk". Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy vs. 10 (Fall 1995) p.
32-4. Motavalli, Jim. "Donating their bodies to science". E: the Environmental Magazine vs. 6 (Sept. /Oct. 1995) p.
30. Zurlo, Joanne. ; Goldberg, Alan M. "Seeking alternatives to whole animal testing". Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy vs. 11 (Spring 1996) p.
31-4. Leahy, Micheal P.T. "Against Liberation: Putting Animals In Perspective". New York: Routledge, 1991.
Caplan, Arthur. "Beastly Conduct: Ethical Issues in Animal Experimentation". Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. July 01, 1984.
EBSCO Host. Glendale Community College. March 25, 2001.