SHOULD ANIMALTESTING BE BANNED 1

Animal testing has been actively used in biomedical research for years, dating back to at

least 500 BC when scientists and physicians started trying to understand the functions of organs

and processes inside the body. It is the use of live animals in experiments to explore the reactions

of their bodies and biological systems to various drugs, food, cosmetics, and chemicals which is

also known as in-vivo testing. It is a prevailing moral and ethical dilemma. Animal testing has

enabled the development of many life-saving treatments for both humans and animals but animal

right activists argue otherwise. Although there have been alternative developments for

experiments on animals there is no alternative method for researching a complete living

organism therefore, it is essential and should be legalized.

Animal testing contributes to life-saving treatments, vaccines, and the sustenance of

human health. Humans are faced with various life-threatening diseases such as cancer, brain

injury, and cystic fibrosis and dangers further increase due to mutations and changes in the

environment. Usage of animals for testing provides cures to such diseases and can help save

several human lives. Scientists have euthanized rats to study brain tissue damage caused by hard

hits. Research proved that there can be brain damage without symptoms of concussion.

[CITATION Loi15 \l 1033 ] Experimenters have treated dogs to isolate insulin to find treatment

for diabetes and Guinea pigs to cure for tuberculosis.[CITATION Loi15 \p 9 \l 1033 ] In another

study utilizing marmosets, it was found that reduced serotonin levels in the brain can cause

behavior like obsessive-compulsive disorder and schizophrenia. [CITATION Loi15 \p 6 \l 1033 ] It

is now, more essential than ever to test for coronavirus vaccine on animals to produce a

treatment for the prevailing pandemic. Nikolai Petrovsky, a professor in the College of Medicine

and Public Health, at Flinders University in Australia said skipping this step would be “fraught

with difficulty and danger.” [ CITATION Bru20 \l 1033 ]

Proponents of animal testing claim that there is no adequate alternative to testing on a

living, body system. Humans and non-human animals have intricate biological systems and

processes within the body that cannot be performed outside the body. Evaluation of drugs and

chemicals involves multiple systems at once for e.g., the circulatory and digestive system, to

perform these complex, lengthy processes with a few cells in a petri-dish is near to impossible.

Animals, especially mammals are best-suited research subjects because their organs (heart,

lungs, kidneys) and organ functions, biological systems and DNA is significantly similar to

humans, like chimpanzees have 99% and mice have 98% similar genetic data. [CITATION

Cal13 \p 1 \l 1033 ] Some organ functions just don’t have an alternative for example even the

most powerful supercomputers, micro-chips and latest technological updates are unable to

accurately simulate the workings of the human brain. [CITATION Froh5 \l 1033 ] Hence, using

alternatives of animal testing is not plausible as they do not produce as accurate results as which

can be obtained from tests on animals, therefore animal testing should not be suppressed.

Animal testing helps pre-conclude the danger and side effects of newly invented drugs

before being used by humans which greatly reduces physical or mental health risks. Animal

testing has improved the pharmacological practice of medicine and expanded understanding of

illnesses. History provides examples of severe consequences of not using animal tests. In 1937, a

pharmaceutical company in the US prepared a drug sulfanilamide, using diethylene glycol

(DEG) without testing on animals this in effect led to mass poisoning, causing the deaths of more

than a hundred people. [ CITATION Rac18 \l 1033 ] After this incident, the Food, Drug, and

Cosmetic Act was passed which made the safety testing of drugs on animals compulsory before

they could be marketed. In the early 1960s thalidomide, an effective tranquilizer and painkiller

which had an inhibitory effect on insomnia, coughs, colds, headaches, and morning sickness was
SHOULD ANIMAL TESTING BE BANNED 3

used by several pregnant women. As it wasn’t tested on animals before more than 10,000

children in 46 countries were born with malformations or missing limbs. [ CITATION Rac18 \l

1033 ] Researchers have also gained invaluable information, a list of Nobel Prize winners relied

on discoveries made the use of animals as human models. Animals have also been a great source

of development in space and the military. They have been used by the US Space Program to see

the effects of weightlessness in space travel. [ CITATION Tar04 \l 1033 ] The Soviet and

American programs could have suffered great losses of human life without animal testing in

human space programs. [ CITATION Tar04 \l 1033 ] Animals have also been used by the US

Department of Defense for research and combat trauma training of military medics.

As many may think otherwise, animal welfare is still taken into account, the most limited

number of animals possible are used and animals’ pain and suffering in experiments is decreased

by the administration of anesthesia. Experiments in the US are conducted per local and state laws

and guidelines, and regulations by the federal Animal Welfare Act (1996), animals are further

approved by an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC). [ CITATION Pro20 \l

1033 ] European Union banned cosmetic testing on animals in 2013 later making few exceptions[

CITATION Rac18 \l 1033 ], this proves animals are not used for unnecessary products or fun

furthermore, alternatives like Genoskin (human skin living up to a week) [ CITATION Mai20 \l

1033 ] in-vitro and “omics” are used when possible. Genoskin has also limited the use of animals

for perfumes, cosmetics, and other chemicals. Authorities and researchers confirm once newer,

better alternatives are available, animal testing will further decrease.

The real question to answer is, is the welfare of humans more important than animals or

not? Animals testing provides cures, vaccines, and treatments to severe diseases for both

humans and animals. Contemporarily, there is no alternative to test a complete body system and
SHOULD ANIMAL TESTING BE BANNED 4

animals are most similar to humans genetically and in terms of orangs and large systems. It aids,

pre-evaluation of side effects of diseases before use by humans, and has taken part in space and

military developments. Animal's health and pain is taken care of and a minimum possible

number is used. As researchers can’t endanger human volunteer’s lives and the outcome from

testing is more rewarding and outweighs the negatives, animal testing should not be banned.

References:
SHOULD ANIMAL TESTING BE BANNED 5

California Biomedical Research Association. (2013, October 15). "CBRA Fact Sheet: Why Are
Animals Necessary in Biomedical Research?", Retrieved from
https://studyres.com/doc/3191688/why-are-animals-necessary-in-biomedical-research%3F

Dundas, M. (2020 June 11). Recycling human skin: An alternative to animal testing? Retrieved
from https://www.france24.com/en/tv-shows/down-to-earth/20201106-recycling-human-skin-an-
alternative-to-animal-testing

Einhorn, B. (2020, March 11). A Virus Cure Depends on Rare Lab Mice, But There Aren’t
Enough. Bloomberg Businessweek. Retrieved from
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-11/a-coronavirus-cure-depends-on-rare-
mice-but-there-aren-t-enough

Frontiers. (2018, March 5). Researchers find Algorithm for Large-scale Brain Simulations.
Frontiers in Neuroscience. Retrieved from
https://www.blog.frontiersin.org/2018/03/02/neuroscience-brain-simulation-algorithm-
exascale/neuroscience-brain-simulation-algorithm-exascale/

Gary, T. (2004, August 2). A Brief History of Animals in Space. Retrieved from
https://history.nasa.gov/animals.html

Hajar R. (2011). Animal testing and medicine. Heart views: the official journal of the Gulf
Heart
Association, 12(1), 42. https://doi.org/10.4103/1995-705X.81548

ProCon.org. (2020, March 18). Should Animals Be Used for Scientific or Commercial Testing?
Retrieved from https://animal-testing.procon.org/

Sepahban, L. (2015). Animal Testing: Life-Saving Research Vs. Animal Welfare. North Mankato:
Compass Point Books