1

Should we have the right to experiment on the animals: Research Essay

Akashdeep Singh (200535049)

Computer System Technician and Networking (CSTN), Georgian @ILAC

COMM 1016: Communication Essentials - 221

Dr. Srinivas Garlapati

July 16th, 2023

Akashdeep Singh (200535049)

 2

Should we have the right to experiment on the animals?

Introduction:
For decades, the use of animals in research and commercial testing has been a source of
contention. People's attitudes towards animals vary; some see them as companions,
while others see them as a method of improving medical skills or expanding
experimental research. Regardless of how individuals feel about animals, the truth is
that they are abused by research centers and cosmetics corporations all throughout the
country and the world.

Despite the fact that scientists frequently employ animals in their research, antidotes for
new viruses, and other activities. I am certain that animal research should be prohibited
since it has the potential to save hundreds of thousands of human lives. I am a firm
believer in animal rights and believe that animal suffering should be minimised to a
minimum.

Main Point 01: Not totally relevant for humans.

Animal experiments cannot consistently predict human trial outcomes, with 94% of
medications that pass animal tests failing in human clinical trials. Over 100 stroke
medications and 85 HIV vaccinations failed in human studies after being successful in
animal testing. Animal studies may also cause researchers to overlook promising cures
and treatments, since certain substances that are unsuccessful on animals may be
beneficial when used on people.

Aspirin, for example, is toxic to some animals, and intravenous vitamin C is beneficial in
treating sepsis in humans but not in mice. Because of animal test results, Fk-506
(tacrolimus) was almost shelved, demonstrating the potential for human suffering from
promising medications that are shelved due to animal test results.

Akashdeep Singh (200535049)

 3

A 2017 investigation discovered further faults in animal experiments, such as erroneous

data interpretation, unanticipated technological challenges, wrongly formed or absent
control groups, selective data reporting, insufficient or changing software systems, and
apparent fraud. Only five of the animals used in studies are legally protected in the
United States. The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) does not apply to rats, mice, fish, and
birds, which account for 95 percent of research animals. The sorts of animals protected
by the AWA account for less than one million animals utilized in research institutions
each year, leaving around 25 million other animals vulnerable to cruelty.

Animal experimentation is not only harsh, but it is also frequently useless. Many
diseases that people develop do not normally occur in animals, such as major kinds of
heart disease, many types of cancer, HIV, Parkinson's disease, or schizophrenia. Instead,
these illnesses' symptoms are intentionally created in animals in labs to imitate human
sickness. Such tests, however, minimize the complexities of human situations, which are
influenced by a wide range of variables such as heredity, socioeconomic considerations,
deeply seated psychological difficulties, and various personal experiences. It is
unsurprising that medicines that show promise in animals rarely function in people.

Here are some examples of unreliable animal testing:

1. Despite looking safe and effective in animal experiments, 92% of medications fail in
human clinical trials, typically for safety reasons or because they do not work.
2. Urology medications have the lowest success rate (only 4% are authorized after
entering clinical trials), followed by heart pharmaceuticals (5%), cancer therapies
(5%), and neurology drugs (6%).
3. A recent study discovered that just 19% of 93 serious medication side effects could
have been predicted by animal experiments.
4. Another research found that over 1,000 putative stroke therapies were "successful"
in animal studies, but none of the 10% that advanced to human trials functioned
well enough in people.

Akashdeep Singh (200535049)

 4

Main Point 02: Animals Suffer from Pain during the Experiment.

Imagine sitting there, wide awake and in great pain, watching scientists implant
numerous needles into you, knowing there is nothing you can do to get out of this
position. According to research, these creatures may suffer bodily injury such as being
burnt, starved, drowned, electrocuted, or poisoned. They may suffer psychological injury
by developing numerous anxieties and becoming chronically unhappy.

Following this, Heart attacks in dogs feel awful bone cancers in mice are painful pigs
being burned, to test burn treatments, is agonizing. Animals living with the induced
conditions is unpleasant also. And they are killed at the end of the experiments to study
the treatments effects. It’s now easy to see why animal testing is wrong it violates basic
principles of ethical research it is maleficent, or harmful to the research subjects it is not
beneficial to them it is forced on them since they don’t consent, and it is unjust in that
animals are burdened with problems not their own.

Animal testing involves scientists using a range of commodities, immunizations, or other

items created for humans but utilized on animals. Although rats, birds, and amphibians
are the most commonly utilized animals in scientific study, scientists do use other
species. The procedures usually cause substantial pain and misery for each individual
animal. Most animals are killed at the end of an experiment, although some may be
used in future study. Animal experimentation expanded in tandem with industrialization.

It is critical to remember that the knowledge obtained. The wellbeing of millions of

people has been improved because of animal trials and study. Animal testing has always
been controversial, and it remains so today since researchers need to conduct studies on
animals to uncover potentially life-saving cures and medicines for humans. As a result,
an unfathomably large number of defenseless creatures are being cruelly slaughtered.
The use of animals in research allows scientists to determine which drugs and cures
more easily are safe and effective for human consumption.

In only one year, the US Department of Agriculture stated that research institutes
utilized almost 300,000 animals in activities involving pain. Furthermore, most animal

Akashdeep Singh (200535049)

 5

studies are defective, resulting in the animal participants' deaths. Peer-reviewed

research discovered substantial faults in most publicly sponsored animal experiments
utilizing rats and primates in the United States and the United Kingdom. Only 59 of the
studies specified the study's hypothesis or purpose, as well as the number and
characteristics of the animals utilized.

According to the Humane Society, over 25 million dogs, cats, monkeys, mice, rats, and
other animals are forced to suffer painful tests in the United States each year, and it is
believed that over 115 million animals are used in laboratory studies globally each year.
According to CFK, several well-known household firms, like LOreal, Estee Lauder, Clorox,
and Johnson, employ animal experimentation to evaluate their goods, and these are just
a few examples.

Main Point 03: Other ways of research.

Animals might be replaced with alternative testing methods such as in vitro testing, 3D
printing, and artificial human skin. These approaches may provide more useful
information than chemical testing on animal skin. According to Michael Bachelor, Senior
Scientist and Product Manager at MatTek, keratinocytes may be used to create normal
skin or to mimic skin diseases such as psoriasis.

Furthermore, human pigment-producing cells, such as melanocytes, may be used to

create coloured skin models that look like human skin from different ethnicities. The EPA
plans to reduce animal testing by 30% by 2025 and remove it completely by 2035.

Scientists can also test vaccines on human volunteers. Humans, unlike animals used in
research, may consent to be studied and are a viable option when the need arises. The
worldwide COVID-19 (coronavirus) pandemic indicated that researchers may bypass
animal testing in favor of focusing on how vaccines operate in humans. Moderna
Therapeutics, one company working on a COVID-19 vaccine, created one using unique
technology: instead of being based on a weakened version of the virus, it was created
using a synthetic duplicate of the COVID-19 genetic code.

Akashdeep Singh (200535049)

 6

Moreover, Human volunteers' healthy and sick tissues can give a more meaningful
approach of researching human biology and illness than animal studies. Human tissue
can be given because of surgery (for example, biopsies, cosmetic surgery, and
transplants). Skin and eye models built from reconstituted human skin and other tissues,
for example, have been produced to replace the brutal rabbit irritation tests.

Human tissue can also be utilized after a person has died (for example, in post-mortem
examinations). Post-mortem brain tissue has yielded vital insights on brain regeneration
as well as the impacts of Multiple Sclerosis and Parkinson's disease.

Conclusion:

Given these arguments, I strongly believe that animal testing should be prohibited
immediately. It is inaccurate to assume that if a treatment works well on an animal, it
will inevitably work effectively on a human. I also feel that animal experimentation is
immoral and inhumane since it causes not only physical pain but also psychological
suffering to the animals. Finally, instead of employing animals as research subjects, there
are several other options accessible. As a result, increasing our understanding of what
we buy will help to keep more of these creatures alive.

Akashdeep Singh (200535049)

 7

Reference

Kojima, H., Seidle, T., & Spielmann, H. (2019). Alternatives to Animal Testing (pp. 37-60).
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-13-2447-5

Animal Testing should Be Banned. (2022, Jun 09). Edubirdie. Retrieved July 14, 2023,
from https://edubirdie.com/examples/animal-testing-should-be-banned/

Britannica (2023, May 10). Should Animals Be Used for Scientific or Commercial Testing?
ProCon.com. https://animal-testing.procon.org/#our-latest-updates

Alternatives to Animal Testing. Cruelty Free International.

https://crueltyfreeinternational.org/about-animal-testing/alternatives-animal-testing

Han, A. (2022, March 24). Why Animal Testing Should Be Banned. The Cougar Star.
https://thecougarstar.com/1948/opinion/why-animal-testing-should-be-banned/

Nobis, N. (2021). Animal Testing Should Be Banned. Libre Texts Humanities.

https://human.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Philosophy/Animals_and_Ethics_101_-
_Thinking_Critically_About_Animal_Rights_(Nobis)/08%3A_Activism_for_Animals/
8.10%3A_Animal_Testing_Should_Be_Banned

Akashdeep Singh (200535049)