Introduction
Animal ethics is as important as human welfare. In the recent past, most research stations and laboratories have always used animals as a testing tool. The most commonly used animals include mice, guinea pigs, rats and rabbits. Mice, for example, are widely used because of their size, fast reproduction rate and their genes are similar to that of a human being (Chatfield & Mathie, 2016). Although the medical space has made a significant milestone with such research, other alternatives need to be identified. The use of animals has proven to be unethical, wasteful and to some extent, unnecessary. I believe that animals should be handled with dignity and accorded some degree of moral status.
First animal testing has failed and is unreliable. Animals are different and do not suffer from the diseases that human beings do, such as heart disease. By inducing signs of these diseases on animals, they underestimate the complex conditions in the human body (Chatfield & Mathie, 2016). Although the outcomes in animal trials were promising, the same has failed in treating human beings. For example, in cancer research, mice have healed successfully, but when the same is applied to humans, the trials are unsuccessful. This process is undoubtedly unreliable by all means since animals do not make the best test subjects.
Violation of animal rights is unethical. The most basic way to do this is by inflicting suffering on animals (Dauber, 2017). Animals such as cats are human companions, and they experience a wide range of emotions. In the laboratories, they develop fear and loneliness while caged in for long hours. The chemical testing process causes immense pain to animals since they are repetitive. Extreme cases include the death of animals by poisoning. This is unquestionably cruel and unethical. Animals should by no means be subjected to such kind of treatment.
Experimenting with animals is wasteful. The entire process is uneconomical in terms of time, money and resources. One, the animals end up being eliminated after the numerous tests, of which most of them fail. This is a loss on animals unnecessarily. Additionally, humans wait for the responses in the trials and in the meantime, they are still in pain, yet they could have sought other alternatives. All the resources that would have been channeled to the research stations would end up wasted, especially when the tests fail. Since animal testing has not helped much in discovering remedies, the resources and money should be diverted to other options that seem progressive (Dauber, 2017).
Alternative testing methods exist and have proven to be cheap, fast and very reliable (Doke & Dhawale, 2015). A good example is the in vitro testing. This involves tests done on human cells or tissues in a petri dish. Other approaches include human-patient stimulators, human-based micro-dosing and use of sophisticated computer modeling. These alternatives are modern, successful and most importantly, humane. With an increase in demand for cruelty-free products, such alternatives should be embraced in all research station. Facing off animal testing is a definite show of humanity.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I support that animal testing should be outlawed because it defies their rights. Animals need not be reduced to tools of scientific tests. They should be treated with respect and handled decently. Although the animals are sacrificed to make products cheaper for human consumption, the animal’s well-being is compromised. Inhumane acts of cruelty and the wasteful process is not worth it, especially if there are other animal-free alternatives (Doke & Dhawale, 2015). Animals can also gain from research without being victims (Dauber, 2017). After all, they are human too.
Annotated Bibliography
Doke, S., & Dhawale, S. (2015). Alternatives to animal testing: A review. Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal, 23(3), 223-229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsps.2013.11.002
This is an online article that suggests alternative options that should be put ynder consideration other than animal experimentation. The author proposes the use of 3Rs strategy that is, reduction, refinement and replacement. Application of this strategy will help to reduce the number of animals used in testing and avoid the unethical procedures.
Dauber, M. (2017). Animal Testing and Medical Ethics in Human Head Transplantation. AJOB Neuroscience, 8(4), 212-214. https://doi.org/10.1080/21507740.2017.1392382
This article agrees that animal experimentation is a necessary process in testing for drugs. Michael says that it has enable scientists to identify what types of drugs are beneficial and those that are harmful to the human system. He also agree that this is a controversial topic especially on matters of moral consciousness. To some extent animal should be treated humanely.
langley, g. (2020). Animal experimentation : the consensus change. macmillan international higher education.
This book addresses the psychological impact of using animals during teaching and testing. Gill is in the support that we all belong to the animal kingdom and as a result the animals need equal treatment as humans. This is with the aim of helping doctors, scientist and technicians to reconsider their stand in using animals. Gill gives a guide line on how to conduct research and test to reduce animal suffering.
Chatfield, K., & Mathie, R. (2016). Response to ”The publication in Homeopathy of studies involving animal experimentation“. Reply to Dr Katy Taylor. Homeopathy, 105(4), 359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.homp.2016.09.005
This editorial contains the ethical standards that researchers need to follow when conducting experiments using animals. It advocates for ethical procedures to avoid unnecessary animal suffering.
