Arguments for Animal Testing

550 Words3 Pages
While the arguments against animal testing are numerous, it still has a tremendous amount of benefit towards humans as a species. One cannot just look at the life expectancy as a measure of how well people live, but instead, we must also look at the quality of life. Should animal testing be eliminated, or, as the article suggests, put under the same ethical code towards the treatment of humans, we will experience a sharp decline in lifespan, and a decrease in the quality of life. The loss of animal testing would result in a sharp decline of lifespan in humans. The one thing most people understand about viruses and bacteria is that they evolve at an extremely rapid pace, leading to what can be called an evolutionary “arms race” between humanity and the diseases we contract. Perfect examples of this can be seen in influenza. Influenza, also known as the flu, continues to evolve year after year. Its rapid evolution is the reason a new vaccine is developed year after year. Having human trials for the vaccine would take too long for any defects (An example would be Thalidomide, which caused birth defects in the 1960s because of incomplete animal testing by today’s standards. US regulations have expanded on what conditions a drug must be tested under due to the incident [Gauvra, 2011]) to show and not having trials is not an option when it comes to the flu. Should the vaccine be unavailable, a significant portion of the population would fall ill every year, and the number of deaths from just the flu would skyrocket. As well, there would be a sharp decline in the quality of life for humans. Many companies use animal trials to test out the safety of new drugs, pesticides, medication, food additives, packing materials, and anything else with chemical ingredients. Testing the toxicology of these substances would be impossible (at least ethically) to do, as it would be

More about Arguments for Animal Testing

Open Document