Also the way that the animals react to the stress of the experiments can severely affect the end results, rendering the experiments meaningless. Although it is true that we need animals to test our medical drugs on because if we didn’t, with modern day technology we wouldn’t be able to find cures for major diseases. But that doesn’t mean we should treat them so
[animal-testing.procon.org] Researchers in Aston University have made it known that it is not worth taking the lives of these animals for testing, because the things we’re trying to make happen with human bodies is very different from the animal body. The anatomic, metabolic, and cellular differences between animals and people make animals poor models for human beings. There is a big percentage from the 1950’s up till now that animal testing is flawed by not being correct when it is given to the people it is for. So why not just stop the animal experiments that are not just killing, but also torturing the animals.
If some countries have come up with the idea to take care of animals and have made even groups and organizations against animal abuse why do, they inhumanly abuse animals for testing. Experimental tests on animals its something unessential, and what if results are erroneous and in animals works perfect and on human results badly. As well, we know that the human body its pretty similar to an animal's body. Some doctors say that animal testing can slow down he results for a research or for a product. Some years ago, they inferred that animal testing cannot speculate how high the risk can be of a product or drug on
Clearly, animal tests are failing to protect people. This is partly because common symptoms, such as nausea, dizziness, headaches and visual disturbance, are essentially impossible to detect in animals. Furthermore, the lives of commonly used laboratory animals are up to 66 times shorter than that of a human being, making it difficult to identify side effects that are slow to develop. Dozens of treatments for stroke have been developed in animals but none has been successful in humans. In conclusion, animal testing should be eliminated because it violates animals’ rights, causing pain and suffering to the experimental animals.
Those who against animal experiments insist that those painful experimentation on animals should be halted. The pain is not moral whether it is experienced by a child, an adult, or an animal. If it is wrong to impose pain on a human being, it is also wrong on an animal. But many people argue that halting animal experiments would end the progress of science and actually human are taking gain from those experiments. Animal experiments should be acceptable if the pain is minimized in all experiments.
A very large percentage of tests conducted on animals have been proven to be futile. Often funding is put into animal testing, but the results do not correlate with human beings. Scientists have given great amounts of their time and effort attempting to find cures for cancer in rodents, but so far have been unable to imitate human cancer in any animal or even come close to finding a cure (Overton 1). Most diseases are unique to a specific species, and this is why using animals to test human medications usually fails. Animal testing has also been proven to be very inaccurate.
Risks involved The risk factors that comes along with keeping such animals are so high compared to the little advantages that people may claim to be getting from them. These animals are wild and keeping them might lead to some accidents which the owner would have to bear with. Because the owner cannot basically meet their needs, these animals may attack unexpectedly and cause great harm. They can also make the owner or anyone who access the premises contract some diseases such as TB, Herpes and even Rabies since taking care of them cannot be compared to taking care of the normal pets such as the dogs. The behaviors of the exotic animals cannot be predicted, one may not order and command their steps each minute and therefore can kill or maim within few seconds.
To the common person, passive cruelty may look like a less serious form of animal cruelty, but that is certainly not the case. Animals suffer greatly from passive cruelty. Severe cases often times lead to death. Examples of passive cruelty are starvation, dehydration, untreated infections, unhealthy living conditions, and failure to care medically for the animal. On the other hand, active cruelty is more well-known.
An environmental theory that has come about because of the issues of treating animals as people has been whether or not the animals kept in captivity will face the loss of their habitat, will face the detrimental effects of global warming with no way to be rescued and also may be targeted by hunters. “Others worry about animals themselves. Steve Feldman, spokesman for the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, says that keeping and breeding animals in captivity is sometimes the only way to safeguard a species. Opponents of captivity, he argues, too often ignore the reality of habitat loss, global warming, hunters, and poachers threatening species in the wild,” according to Berdik (2013). It is a very real possibility that by releasing an animal from captivity and essentially treating them as a human that the animal could face complete loss of their natural habitat and may end up extinct or near-extinct due to hunters targeting them.
People often do not realize that the act of neglecting, ignoring can also be a part of animal abuse. They also do not realize that animal cruelty is an act of killing ourselves that can be solved by law enforcement, environmental protection, prohibition of animal testing. People are under the obsession that animal testing is one of the safest ways to experiment different chemicals and rationalize themselves from the fact that it’s one of the tragic ways to kill a living creature.