An argument against animal experimentation in the united states

First, such suffering can occur when a given research protocol is not well justified scientifically. Scientists studying how animals evolve use many animal species to see how variations in where and how an organism lives their niche produce adaptations in their physiology and morphology.

The tiny amount consumed from ingesting a hamburger made from a treated cow will cause death in such a person unless they receive a bone marrow transplant. Chloramphenicol is an example of a drug whose effects vary from species to species: Rats always breathe through the nose. For example, Rezulin for diabetes passed animal tests with flying colours but killed thousands of people before it was withdrawn in There are other important criticisms of the U.

Carbone, What Animals Want: For many types of cancer and for diseases like AIDS, prevention is not just better than cure — it is the only cure.

Even when alternatives to the use of animals are available, U. Public opinion for various animal research issues is somewhat contradictory and confused.

It is imperative that we cherish, nurture, and endeavor to protect all life forms. Estimates for the total number of animals used in research worldwide hover around million to million, while estimates for the U.

These studies are particularly powerful since the basic controls of development, such as the homeobox genes, have similar functions in organisms as diverse as fruit flies and man. His current research includes a project funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation to create a database of state statutes and cases criminalizing HIV exposure and a project on a legal framework for newborn whole-exome screening.

Many doctors and scientists oppose animal testing, but very powerful vested interests ensure its continuation. Furthermore, according to the World Health Organization, cancer is largely preventable, yet most health organizations that focus on cancer spend a pittance on prevention programs, such as public education.

We reviewed thousands of scientific papers and examined the history of medicine at length. In any case, enforced uniformity across IACUCs is a dangerous solution to propose for the problem of varying standards, in the absence of clear knowledge about whose standards are appropriate—and whose would be enforced.

The major reason new drugs are still tested on animals is to protect companies in court when people are injured or killed by adverse drug reactions. Some medical professional organizations, like the American Board of Anesthesiologists, even require physicians to complete simulation training—not animal laboratories—to become board-certified.

The success of these antibiotics led to the dramatic decrease in infections caused by open-wound contamination — 5 out of everor 60 yearly mothers contracted deadly bacterial infections, a reduction from the previous statistic of out ofor yearly. Multiple Regulatory Approaches Animal welfare laws must address three main ways in which unnecessary animal suffering can occur in the context of medical experimentation.

No cardiac, renal [kidney] or central nervous system [side effects] in any species. Federal standards are full of specific requirements for different kinds of studies, but in general, it is fair to say that they offer the most concrete guidance on questions of animal housing and care.

Fact Sheet: Cosmetic Testing

This act also known as ASPA provides for the licensing of experimental and other scientific procedures carried out on any vertebrate animal that may cause pain, suffering, distress, or lasting harm.

Depo-Provera This contraceptive was barred from release in the US in because it caused cancer in dogs and baboons.

We are entering an era of personalised medicine, where individually tailored prescribing will make drugs much safer and more effective. Their gut flora are in a different location.

This makes their work somewhat questionable as to their credibility, but as a whole the article is laid out in a way that makes their claim easy to understand. Education about alternatives and their effectiveness is key.

Clearly, a careful study of the medical literature is required in order to make an informed judgement. Second, scientists have in fact figured out how to use stem cells to treat various diseases, including juvenile diabetes, motor neuron degenerative disorders and sickle cell anemia to name a couple.

Many doctors and scientists oppose animal testing, but very powerful vested interests ensure its continuation. Adverse drug reactions kill overpeople a year in the US and almost as many in the UK. Unlike the farms and feedlots that we often see while driving through the countryside, animal research and breeding facilities are much more hidden from view.

Hardly anyone not directly involved in animal research knows that they exist, much less who their members are. It may be an indulgence for us, but the theobromine present in chocolate can induce vomiting in dogs; not too different from what aspirin does to a cat.

The most urgent need is for more to be done to implement the three Rs. Such a reform would require us to confront directly the question of how much suffering humans can impose on other species in return for small but real gains in knowledge.

His current research includes a project funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation to create a database of state statutes and cases criminalizing HIV exposure and a project on a legal framework for newborn whole-exome screening. This means that there is no federal legal pressure on private firms such as drug companies to reduce or refine animal use, or to replace animals with computer or tissue models—a strategy that may be particularly feasible in studies of toxicology or drug metabolization.

Although one-sided his articles are free of fallacious statements and provides counter-arguments and his rebuttals in all of his writings, making his claims more note-worthy.

First, there is the question of scientific justification for animal suffering. What kind of research do they do?Arguments Against Animal Testing That Everyone Should Know About Animal Experimentation Pros and Cons.

Animal Experimentation Facts. Popular French Last Names Stone at Disneyland. Pros and Cons of Globalization. Pros and Cons of Using Cell Phones in School. Social Issues in the United States.

Arguments Against Animal Testing That Everyone Should Know About

Funny Campaign Slogans. Some research animals may come from relatively regulated companies such as Charles River or Interfauna, based in countries like the United States, England, or Spain. Other animals, such as monkeys, more often come from international suppliers that operate in.

Its animal experimentation regulations apply to any school or research facility that purchases or transports live animals in interstate commerce or that receives federal funding. But in fact the law has never reached the bulk of warm-blooded animals actually used in research.

The vast majority of biologists and several of the largest biomedical and health organizations in the United States endorse animal testing. A poll of 3, scientists by the Pew Research Center found that 89% favored the use of animals in scientific research.

Although the first Humane Society in the United States was established init was not until the end of the 19th century when scientific disciplines were necessary for the education of physicians that protests against the use of animals for experimentation became organized.

Moxley, Angela. "The End of Animal Testing." The Humane Society of the United States, Web Accessed March 3, 9. Moxley, Angela. "The End of Animal Testing." The Humane Society of the United States, Web Accessed March 3, Ibrahim, Darian M. "Reduce, refine, replace: The failure of the three R's and the future of animal experimentation." U.

Chi. Legal F,

Download
An argument against animal experimentation in the united states
Rated 3/5 based on 27 review