Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Should we use animals for scientific tests? - Coggle Diagram
Should we use animals for scientific tests?
Thesis Statement
We should not use animals for scientific tests because animal models do not reflect human diversity, animal experiments are not reproducible, and there are ethical concerns with animal experimentation/testing.
Hook
It Is Estimated More Than 110 Million Animals Are Killed in the U.S. Annually for Experimentation Purposes.
"We must fight against the spirit of unconscious cruelty with which we treat the animals. Animals suffer as much as we do. True humanity does not allow us to impose such sufferings on them. It is our duty to make the whole world recognize it. Until we extend our circle of compassion to all living things, humanity will not find peace." - Albert Schweitzer
Have you ever asked yourself the questions, "What entitles humans to experiment on animals and inflict pain upon them?"
History and Background
Animal testing has been around for many years and has served a variety of purposes.
A second notable event in the history of animal testing was when John H. Draize created the Draize Test, which is used on the skin and eyes of animals, such as rabbits, to test the effects of a product. Another example is the LD-50 (Lethal Dose-50) test, which was created in the mid 1900s.
Galen, a physician in 2nd-century Rome, dissected pigs and goats, and is known as the "Father of Vivisection."[2] Avenzoar, an Arabic physician in 12th-century Moorish Spain who also practiced dissection, introduced animal testing as an experimental method of testing surgical procedures before applying them to human patients.
According to Emma Lloyd, “The first observations of significance to modern science were made in the 1600s, when William Harvey used animals to observe and describe the blood circulatory system” (2008).
The history of animal testing goes back to the writings of the Ancient Greeks in the 4th and 3rd centuries BCE, with Aristotle (384–322 BCE) and Erasistratus (304–258 BCE) one of the first documented to perform experiments on nonhuman animals.
Specialized Info
LD-50 is used to determine the maximum dosage of a substance that would kill half the animals in a testing group. It was used in experiments with household products, pesticides, and drugs. Although these specific tests are not as commonly used today, they demonstrate the terrible treatment animals have faced.
Today, many industries use animal testing for different products, including cosmetics, medications, household goods, and pesticides.
According to the Humane Society Factsheet on cosmetic testing, during experimentation, “chemicals are rubbed on shaved skin or dripped into the eyes without any pain relief.
Argument #3: Animal models do not reflect human diversity
Humans and animals are very different, so outdated animal experiments often don’t accurately mimic how the human body will respond to drugs, chemicals or treatments.
Laboratory procedures and conditions exert influences on animals’ physiology and behaviors that are difficult to control and that can ultimately impact research outcomes. Animals in laboratories are involuntarily placed in artificial environments, usually in windowless rooms, for the duration of their lives. Captivity and the common features of biomedical laboratories; such as artificial lighting, human produced noises, and restricted housing environments; can prevent species-typical behaviors, causing distress and abnormal behaviors among animals
Drugs tested on animals ultimately fail in human trials, according to the National Institutes of Health.
Argument #2: Animal experiments are not reproducible
Eliminating all sources of variation other than the experimental intervention is meant to increase the precision of the results, while at the same time reducing the number of animals per experiment. However, the experts suggested this rigorous standardization narrows down the range of animals and conditions to which the findings can reliably be generalized.
Many animal experiments are conducted under such a narrow range of conditions that there is a significant risk of obtaining results that are unlikely to be reproducible
Context-dependent biological variation presents a unique challenge to the reproducibility of results in experimental animal research, because organisms’ responses to experimental treatments can vary with both genotype and environmental conditions.
Argument #1: There are ethical concerns with animal experimentation/testing
Each year, it is estimated that more than 50 million dogs, cats, monkeys, rabbits, rats and other animals are forced to endure painful experiments in the U.S.
These animals are deliberately sickened with toxic chemicals or infected with diseases, live in barren cages and are typically killed when the experiment ends.
Although the U.S. leads the world on innovative research and methods, many companies here still use the outdated, barbaric practice of animal testing, which can result in the burning, crippling, and poisoning of animals.