Rhetorical Analysis of The Evil of Animal Rights “The Evil of Animal Rights” is an article that was written by Alex Epstein and Yaron Brook. The article addressees the medical testing that is being done on animals. The author of the article talks about the medical advances that have been done using animals as testing. Without the animals, there wouldn't be as many new medicines and new cures that there are now. The author also talks about the protesters and the problems they have given to the companies that have any relation with animal testing.
Some people say these experiments are cruel, and animals should not be used. While others say they would rather see these experiments done on animals instead of humans themselves. b. Thesis statement- Animal experimentation for medical purposes should be carried out, instead of scientist performing human tests. c. Main points- My main points are; medical advances for humans due to animal experiments, medical advances for animals due to animal experimentation, how the animals are really treated, laws that are enforced, and why animals are used. 2.
Animal Rights For many years there has been a major debate regarding animal rights. Human beings have been using animals for food, shelter, safety, clothing, and more recently for medical research. The main drawback of using animal for all these things is the way we treat them. Our cultural beliefs have changed throughout the years and we become insensitive to how we take care of the animal. As human beings we have failed in recent years to give the animals the respect and rights they deserve.
Did you know that for every successful clone there are dozens of failures? More than 90% of cloning attempts fail. In addition, cloned animals tend to have serious health problems, shorter life spans, and birth defects. Cloning is making an exact copy of an animal using its DNA. I would not clone my dog because it can be dangerous, it can affect adoption rates, and if it fails the animal suffers.
In the story of the Evil of Animal “Rights”, the writer tells us that animals are being test every day which causes death to most of them. He says that it is not a right to kill animals. Then, he gives so many evidences to prove using testing animals are extinct. I think, using animals for testing give us new vaccine which makes our lives better. Without animals for testing, where would our lives be going?
It is easier for your doctor to diagnose Lupus if you have the most common symptoms and your blood has certain proteins. The proteins are called antinuclear antibodies, or ANA. But other problems can cause your body to make ANA’s so doctors will use blood test and other tests to find out if you have
Drug manufacturers test medications on animals after they have been injected with viruses and diseases to see if the medications work on the animals. There are many companies who use animal research to test their products; unfortunately these organizations do not look for alternatives besides animal testing. If these atrocious acts were committed outside laboratories, they would be felonies. But animals suffer and die every day in laboratories with little or no protection from cruelty. It is immoral to
Ethical concerns about cloning may be broadly divided into two categories: concern about the effect of cloning on animal and human welfare, and objection to the principle of cloning, ie, to producing an animal by a means other than fertilization. Currently, cloning is associated with an increase in animal suffering when compared with production of animals by standard breeding methods. This is due to surgeries performed to obtain oocytes or transfer embryos, pregnancy losses, sickness and death of neonates, low-level abnormalities in surviving young and possible distress from disease in animals produced as disease models. These concerns are somewhat mitigated by the fact that most of these findings are not unique to cloning; they are also associated with other procedures that have been generally accepted as worthwhile, such as in vitro fertilization and embryo production, oocyte transfer, and embryo transfer. In addition, the accepted normal fate of many species being cloned is to be housed for maximal production and then be slaughtered and eaten.
What is it about pesticides that makes it concerning? Over the last few years there has been an increase in awareness of the harm to humans and animals caused by foreign chemicals entering our systems. Everything from Lymphoma to melanoma, to neurological disorders has been reported in humans from exposure to chemicals. Animals have been recorded as having deformities and illnesses as well. So if we know there is a link between chemicals and illnesses in both humans and animals, then why would we treat our crops with chemicals?
Testing cosmetics on animals should be banned. Millions of animals are killed every year due to the tests that were done on them by cosmetic companies for their products. Instituting safety precaution for the end-users has been their major affair to conduct such tests on animals. In contrary, more reliable results has emerged tremendously via alternative test methods that are available which does not require animal testing for cosmetics that was found by the Food and Drug Administration. More humane non-animal testing methods have been used by hundreds of companies such as “Clarins, Dermalogica, Estee Lauder and Clinique”.