Tests Animals example essay topic

Animal Testing Each year in the United States an estimated 100 million animals are maimed, blinded, scalded, force-fed chemicals, genetically manipulated, and otherwise hurt or killed in the name of science by private institutions, household product and cosmetic companies, government agencies, educational institutions, and scientific centers (Mukherjee 32). Their eyes are surgically removed; their brains and spinal cords damaged, and there bones broken. The use of anesthesia is not mandated by law, and consequently, is rarely administered. Despite all of this cruelty, not a single disease has been cured through vivisection. Vivisection is the medical term for the practice of experimenting on animal's (33).

The overall cancer rate has risen in the past 40 years and a fatal heart attack strikes a person every 45 seconds. The Centers for Disease Control estimate that 70-80 percent of the common diseases killing Americans are preventable given a responsible diet and lifestyle (Kaufman 81). Drug testing on animals is inhumane and does not benefit humans or animals at all. More than 205,000 new drugs are marketed worldwide every year, most after undergoing the most common unreliable test method still in use: animal vivisection.

The current systems of drug testing are the eye irritancy test, acute toxicity test, and the skin irritancy test (Catalano 57). In the eye irritancy test, (The Draize test) a powdered substance is dropped into the eyes of a group of albino rabbits. They are usually immobilized in stocks from which only their heads protrude and receive no anesthesia. Substances vary from mascara to aftershave and even oven cleaner.

Lab technicians record the damage to the eye tissue at specific intervals over an average period of 168 hours. Reactions to the substances include swollen eyelids, inflammation, ulceration, bleeding, swollen irises massive deterioration, and blindness. Some of these studies continue for weeks, and all the while no measures are made to reduce suffering or treat the rabbits. During these tests, rabbits eyelids are usually held open with clips, because of this, many animals try to break their necks as they try to escape (Miller 3). Acute toxicity tests determine the amount of a substance that will kill a percentage, even up to one hundred percent, of a group of test animals. In these tests, a substance is forced by tube into an animal's stomach or through holes cut in their throats.

Animals are forced to inhale a substance, or have the substance applied to their rectum or vagina. These tests continue until half of the test animals die. Experimenters observe the animal's reactions which can include convulsions, labored breathing, malnutrition, skin eruptions, and bleeding from the eyes, nose, or mouth (Miller 4). Skin irritancy tests are conducted on rabbits, guinea pigs and other animals. The process involves placing chemicals on the animal's raw, shaved skin and covering the skin with adhesive plaster. The animals are immobilized in restraining devices to prevent them from struggling.

Meanwhile, laboratory workers apply the chemicals, which burn into the animal's skin (Miller 4). During these tests animals will often endure excruciating pain, convulsions, loss of motor functions, seizures, vomiting, paralysis, and bleeding from every open orifice in the body. Any animals that somehow manage to survive these particular tests are subsequently destroyed (McCoy 24). Not only are these tests cruel, but the results are unreliable and unnecessary as scientific evidence. As with the aforementioned eye test, rabbits eyes are not the same as human eyes – there are profound differences, mainly the absence of tear ducts. In addition, different species react differently to various substances; substances that fail to damage a rabbit's eye may be toxic to a human (Morrison 20).

Nicotine is lethal to humans, but not dogs, pigeons, or rats. Results from experiences, which exposed a variety of animal species to cigarette smoke, led researchers to believe that smoking did not cause cancer. Because of this, warning labels on packs were delayed for years and cigarette manufacturers still use animal data to question the harmful effects of their products (Catalano 172). Drugs such as Ora flex, Selacryn, Zo max, Sup rol and Merito l produced such adverse side effects in humans, including death, that they were removed from the market, though animal experimentation had predicted them all to be safe. (Morrison 20) Many drugs that are beneficial to humans are dangerous or even fatal to animals: Penicillin is an antibiotic to humans but kill's guinea pigs. Aspirin caused birth defects in rats, mice, monkeys, guinea pigs, cats and dogs, but not humans (Miller 1).

One of the few studies that examined the differences in species reactions found only that 5-25 percent correlation between harmful effects in people and the results of animal experiments (Morrison 20). Laboratory research involving animals is cruel and merciless treatment of helpless creatures. No law requires that cosmetics and household products be tested on animals, and since non-animal alternatives exist, it is hard to understand why some companies still continue to conduct these tests, killing millions of animals every year (Kaufman 80). New regulations and laws will create some dilemmas and make some kinds of research more costly. The United States government requires that companies test their products for safety before placing them on the market, but government regulations do not insist upon animal tests for product safety (Catalano 37). The USDA (United States Department of Animals) inspects laboratories where animals are used and enforces federal laws regarding treatment and care of animals (Miller 5).

The Animal Welfare Act and institutional animal care committees regulate animal research laboratories that receive federal funding (5). The Laboratory Welfare Act, the law governing animal care in laboratories and other nonfarm facilities, was signed into law in 1966. It was the fifth federal statute passed in this country for the protection of animals. The purpose was to set up care standards for dogs, cats, primates, rabbits, hamsters, and guinea pigs in animal dealer's premises and in laboratories prior to experimental use (Dolan 35). The number of animals used in laboratories is going down. The U. S uses between eighteen and twenty-two million animals a year.

Scientists have changed. Some experiments in the 1950's would not have occurred today, because they would cause too much suffering. It has been estimated that animal experimenters world wide, have decreased by 30-50 percent in the last 15-20 years. In the United States survey by the American Medical Association, it was found that 75 percent of Americans are against using animals in cosmetic and drug testing (Miller 2). While animals still continue to be violated in laboratories, a consciousness about our responsibility toward our relationship with animals has begun and continued to rise. As a result of pressures from animal advocacy groups such as PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) and A AVS (American Anti-Vivisection Society), a number of large corporations have ceased all animal testing in recent years.

These Corporations include Avon, Amway, Benetton, Revlon and even General Motors, who used to subject animals to crash / impact tests. In addition, the general public has begun to lean toward and seek out those products which are not tested on animals, in the cosmetics industry, cruelty-free products are one of the fastest growing market segments (Barnard 81). Consumers have at long-last begun to realize that with the vast number of cosmetics and personal care products on the market today, it is impossible for a company to rationalize animal testing in the name of another shampoo or nail polish. In particular, available alternatives to animal testing; some of which include cell cultures; tissue cultures; corneas from eye banks; and sophisticated computer and mathematical models (82). Researchers have better methods at their disposal, including epidemiological studies, clinical intervention trials, astute clinical observation aided by laboratory testing, human tissue, autopsy studies, endoscopic examination and biopsy, as well as new imaging methods. And the emerging science of molecular epidemiology, which relates genetic metabolic and biochemical factors with epidemiological data on disease incidence, offers significant promise for identifying the causes of human disease (Barnard 81).

Many animals resemble humans in elements of structure, physiology, and behavior, but because they also differ in some important respects, some scientists consider the results of animal studies of limited value, and not necessarily applicable to humans. Animals have different biological systems than humans; therefore, the tests cannot be as accurate as the current tests (Catalano 33). The non-animal test results have in fact proved themselves more accurate than those involving animal cruelty. Avon Company has already endorsed an alternative to the eye irritancy test, Eytex System. Developed by In Vitro International assesses irritancy with a protein alteration system. The greater the irritation, the more opaque the solution becomes (Catalano 227).

The Skin tex formula, developed by the same corporation, is made from the yellow meat of a pumpkin rind; it mimics the reaction of human skin to foreign substances. Both these can be used to determine the toxicity of more than 5,000 different materials. Tissue and cell cultures can be grown in a laboratory from single cells from human or animal tissues. Neo Derm, made by Marrow-Tech, begins with the injection of skin cells into a sterile plastic bag containing a biodegradable mesh. The cells attach to the mesh and grow around it, like a vine in a garden.

After the segment of skin is sewn onto the patient, the mesh gradually dissolves (Catalano 229). Non-animal tests are generally faster and less expensive than the animal tests they replace and improve upon. Eytex testing kits can test three concentrations of a chemical for under a hundred dollars; a Draize test of comparable range would cost more than one thousand dollars. According to the Foundation for Biomedical Research, the cost of lab animals varies widely, from two dollars for a mouse, to two hundred dollars for a rabbit with clogged arteries, to ten thousand dollars for a pregnant baboon (Catalano 32). There are a lot of steps the consumer can do to help and prevent the destruction of our animals. Buy cosmetics, personal care, and household products that have not been tested on animals; this involves taking on the responsibility of becoming an educated and compassionate consumer (Rowan 81).

If animal experimentation was eliminated, it would free up 6.8 billion dollars that could be used for education programs and medical assistance programs for low-income individuals, helping the more than 30 million U. S citizens who cannot afford health insurance rather than making animals sick (McCoy 103). In Conclusion, treating animals humanely is not only morally sound, but also economically beneficial. Humane treatment of animals has become an advertising pitch. Products that have not been tested on animals appeal to the average consumers educated conscience. In addition, all good researchers insist that animals be treated humanely – not only out of compassion but also because valid work depends on clean, healthy research subjects that are not victims of physical or emotional stress (Rohr 106).

Mankind often disregards the rights of other living beings but times are changing for the better due to the increasing pressure of the consumer. Society has begun to take notice of this pressing global concern because intelligent life should not be subjected to this form of torture. From the theory of evolution and the emergence of man, humans have to understand that this planet is not only ours, but the animals as well. There are a number of things that mankind can do to prevent this cruelty from continuing, it is simply a matter of taking the initiative to inform and involve ourselves and others.

Every individual effort is a step towards the annihilation of animal cruelty (Travis 27)..