For protected sex, appetizing treats and moisturized skin, over 100 million animals succumb to testing in laboratories for medical training, chemicals, food, cosmetics needs, biology lessons and drugs annually. The animal testing industry has become a real-life version of 1000 Ways to Die. Each year, companies find new ways to exploit and test animals for the benefit of humans. In recent years, there has been a growing movement of veganism and anti-animal testing activists coming out and fighting for the humane treatment of animals. Companies have become more conforming to the movement to not lose that population of consumers. While others remain unbothered and continue to test on animals. I believe the animal testing industry is vile. The matter of debate is still intact, should we continue testing products on animals?
In science today, the increase in a number of animals used for research purposes presents a significant societal derail on the fight against animal testing. Ferdowsian and Nancy put it that the testing of animals for scientific reasons dates back to 1959 indicating a long time of suffering and perpetration of this practice (par 2). Those in support of these tests attest that animals are a resourceful avenue through which testing of subjects with close similarity to humans are possible. Testing these influences the development of vaccines in the treatment of human diseases, it has created possibilities of discoveries on drugs curing a high number of diseases. Given the simplicity of animals in serving this scientific role, complexity on its stoppage further mounts considering the animals present the only available option for testing besides humans. The legality of their application in testing further enhances their use. The level of similarity between the animals and humans has further enhanced their continued application in the laboratory for testing. Further studies reveal the likeness of humans and animals providing a basic reason explaining their application in experiments of science aimed at providing answers to problems faced by people. Blais et al. conduct a study on this subject with a focus on the metabolic networks possessed by both the humans and rats. These authors affirm that the use of animals remains a crucial contributor to science due to the cellular responses aimed at learning the reactions of the animals to drugs or scientific aspects before the transfer of a similar knowledge or application to humans (par 2). The indication of these studies is that the two are much alike and hence present an appropriate platform for comparison based on the relationship in physiological aspects. Roughly 99% of the human genes are also present in rats making them ideal candidates or specimen when studying scientific procedures in humans.
In a bid to regulate the use of animals for testing in procedures of scientific nature, the development of legislation in this regard has emerged as an appropriate avenue for the management of the problem. A study conducted by Metzger reveals emotional reactions arise from the use of animals in laboratories (par 1). It has stirred debate that threatens the continued application of animals despite their presentation as the appropriate options for scientific procedures. Proponents of this approach have insisted on the right of humans to use animals for scientific tests with some laboratory facilities domesticating the animals so that they can control the population available to them for purposes of research. On the contrary, opponents of the use of animals debate on the moral authority in humans to use animals in their studies. The study conducted by Metzger carries a poll on public opinion conducted in the United States reveals a polarized population on the subject. 56% of the participants had the belief that the use of animals for scientific tests is morally right while 39% affirmed their position on it as a wrongdoing (par 2). The differences in the populations on the subject are an indication that there is no common ground to feature and hence the development of regulations that control activities of animal testing. The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) is such a piece of legislation developed for this purpose. The USDA is the body organ charged with enforcement of the Act that has presented a basis on which regulation is possible.
The use of animals in scientific studies does not only present an ethical dilemma but also features as indecent and puts to display the cruelty of the human species on other animals. A study conducted by Ascione and Kenneth reveals that animal abuse is that nonaccidental behavior that is socially acceptable but causes pain, distress or suffering to animals (par 3). In the worst case, it causes death to the animals. Inclusive of these is the emotional abuse that the animals undergo which influences cruelty or symbolizes it from humans to the animals. The definition of animal abuse also encompasses the cruelty aspect that has continued to prevail in the treatment of animals raising questions about the inhumane nature of this treatment. The development of legislation governing the handling of animals by a human is aimed at reducing this nature of effect or treatment on animals. The level of cruelty meted on animals is evident in their treatment after the experiments. Some of these are discarded after testing. BBC reveals that in some experiments, the testing of the safety of the drugs or scientific aspects is performed on animals to safeguard loss of human lives (par 2). Question is doesn't the life of the animal matter? The dilemma arising from this is one that has prompted the continued debate on what is right and wrong in terms of treating animals used in a scientific testing.
In an article developed by Bastasch, it is revealed that animal use in scientific testing is an expensive affair with a budget framed at $14.5 billion annually. The federal government according to this article is the biggest funding authority presenting the vast majority of the financial resources. Bastasch reveals that it's not only an obscene amount spent for this cruelty but also provides support to the cruel treatment of animals. In this same article, the author reveals that 47% of the total grants provided to the country has an element of animal research embedded. Doke and Shashikant discuss cheaper options available for use instead of animals which does not only perpetrate cruelty to them but also contributes to a significant expenditure of resources (par 3). Among the alternatives are three Rs which represent the reduction, replacement and refinement aspects of animal testing. The approach advocates for the use of a lesser number of animals in the tests compared to the current state hence facilitating the saving of a large number of the cruelty which represent reduction. The element of replacement features the exchange for animals in testing for non-sentient items replacing the use of animals in a conscious state also under replacement, the use of animals without exposure to distress. The aim of the test is on the use of animals considering the similarity that they possess with humans as perceived. In spite of this fact, there exist other highly similar items besides animals which would provide a justifiable element in animal testing in science. Perhaps focusing on finding alternative testing elements besides animals will present a better and less cruel approach to scientific testing an approach that takes into account the welfare of animals and protects them from harm considering the cost of conducting these tests and the percentage of fatalities on animals remain high.
Summarily, animal testing has been a very controversial subject and the arguments have come equipped with lots of evidence to prove their position on the subject. Animal testing should be banned and focus directed to alternative methods. Likewise, many groups believe the same. The rate at which we are testing on these animals has sprung out of control and there is a need for change. Not only is animal testing alarming and harmful to animals, but it affects our ecosystem and environment heavily. Admittedly, reform should be brought to the animal testing industry now, as we need it the most.