Negative Effects of Animal Testing (Essay Sample)

Negative Effects of Animal Testing

On estimate, more than one hundred million animals endure immense suffering and death in the United States, according to the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. The animals experience this in the hands of institutions that utilize them for chemical, drug and foodstuff tests, medical training activities and medical experiments driven by curiosity, as well as, in biology classes. In all these activities, animals such as mice, rabbits, cats, dogs and rats among other animals spend a considerable part of their lives caged where frustration, loneliness, terror and eventual death hover over them. Researchers deem such tests as for the good of the people. The determination of the safety of substances through animals is unwarranted and should not happen. It is cruel and inhumane, its utilizations impede the utilization of effective alternative methods of testing, drugs do not become safe by basically passing the animal tests, the tests are unreliable, and their utilization is a waste of resources.

Animal testing imposes cruelty and inhumane treatment of animals. Animals utilized in research are exposed to a diverse array of experiments such as testing of new drugs in the market, being infected with viruses to test the spread and metamorphosis of the virus, poisoning with toxic substances to determine how fast death occasion and embedding of electrodes to their brains. Also, scientists introduce diseases in their systems so that they can present various treatments and observe the healing process. All these tests involve the conducting of invasive, painful and deadly procedures that push the animals to their limit, through the never-ending pain that even a human being cannot endure. Moreover, laboratories are not an ideal living environment for the said animals. Here, they live in cages by themselves and restrained by devices depriving them of freedom, companionship and natural habitat in which, they thrive. Such treatment and environment expose them to the worst form of abuse, which for a society that claims to be moral and ethical should not be conducting.

The utilization of animal testing results in the ignorance of promising alternative methods of testing. In the United States, research facilities have discovered other methods of testing, which are more effective thus, can replace animal use. For instance, in vitro testing is the method by which, human cells undergo culture and then utilized in testing for different experiments. Microdosing is another alternate method of testing whereby scientists expose human volunteers to the minimum dosage of various drugs with few reactions and observe their blood work for the results. Also, the utilization of human skin cells is an effective and less dangerous method of testing for the effects of various commercial products such as skin care products. Moreover, the computer made molecular structures can also provide adequate and accurate results in predicting the toxicity level of substances. Thus, with such viable, tested and result oriented tests scientists can successfully help humans. However, the continued utilization of animal testing limits the widespread utilization of such testing methods.

Animal testing is an unreliable method of testing. Despite chimpanzees sharing a ninety-nine percent DNA with people, and mice’s genetic makeup being ninety-eight percent similar to people, they are still poor test subjects. Animals utilized in tests differ from humans in their anatomic makeup, their metabolic systems and their cellular make up, thereby leading to ninety percent of all drugs that utilize animal testing and succeed failing when tried among humans. Therefore, trying to create a model that accurately resembles a human being is difficult thus; it results in the grand fails observed in the human trials. Additionally, animals do not suffer from various human ailments such as heart diseases, some types of cancers, HIV and schizophrenia among others. Consequently, scientists end up mimicking these ailments in animals when studying them and developing a cure. Nonetheless, such experiments do not put into consideration people’s genetics, lifestyle and psychological issues. Thus, results in low success rates of treatments of five percent for cancer drugs and seven percent for heart medication.

Drugs that are effective in animal testing are not always safe. Past research analysis has shown that the success of animal testing rarely determines the effectiveness and safety of a drug. Further, the analyses observe that animal tests only enable scientists to predict a small percentage of nineteen percent of side effects of drugs out of the ninety-three percent side effects in existence. Therefore, utilizing various animals introduces dangerous consequences for people who end up utilizing the various medications. For instance, a 2016 drug developed to treat anxiety and Parkinson’s disease in France led to the death of one volunteer and the severe brain damage of others. However, it’s testing on four species of animals failed to show these consequences. The Vioxx drug developed to treat arthritis led to the worldwide deaths of 140,000 persons and induction of 320, 000 heart attacks. Contrary, its animal trial that comprised of five animal species and testing on monkeys cleared it as safe. Thus, the biological and cellular differences in animals make animal testing a dangerous method of determining the safety of drugs for humans, as people and rats can never be similar.

Animal testing results in wastage of resources. According to researchers, the United States invests about fifty billion dollars each year in drug research and utilize millions of animals in the experiments. Nevertheless only six percent of drugs receive an approval each year, and even so, a number of them end up becoming ineffective and inducing negative reactions to patients. Further, biotechnology institutions’ comparison of animal testing and in vitro testing found that animal testing is financially draining as compared to the in vitro tests, which are more effective. Thus, with 5 percent success rate of cancer drugs, 6 percent of psychiatry drugs, 7 percent for heart medication and 8 percent for neurological medication, animal testing becomes a wasteful venture by the government of taxpayers’ dollars.

In conclusion, the use of animals in determining the safety of various substances in research is a practice heavily relied on by research institutions worldwide, but one that poses numerous adverse consequences. Such institutions report that their experiments impose moderate or severe anguish towards the animals. However, the introduction of deadly diseases, chemicals, and invasive procedures makes animal testing a cruel and inhumane treatment that inhibits the animals from their natural environment and expose them to anguish, pain, and death. The high reliance on animal testing causes scientists to ignore alternative methods of testing, while their unreliability and poor safety record pose a danger to human health and results in wastage of resources. Hence, people should strive to end animal suffering by stopping animal testing.

related articles