Why is Animal Testing Important? Explained reasons + Further scientific hypothesis
The evolution of science has become massive in the last years. Whether it is medicine, astronomy, biology, physics or chemistry, the recent findings of scientific research are absolutely impressive. For the most part, research requires a long process of experiments. Therefore, many laboratories tend to exploit animals in their research. However, there might be a different perspective concerning this scientific use. In fact, this topic usually creates a heated controversy between two opposing sides. By and large, although many organizations appeal for the respect of animal rights, scientific research makes it fundamental to use them for experiments.
1- Animal testting doesn't mean inflicting serious wounds and pain on animals!
Many people oppose to the use of animals in science, and support their position by considering animal testing as a harmful act toward these beings. They also justify this objection by the popular belief that animals are generally subjected to radical changes of their natural lifestyle, food deprivation, consecutive and forced injections, or even worse: mutilation. However, as a matter of fact, these are only stereotypes and fallacious ideas about this topic. The reality is that only 8% of scientific experiments actually inflict serious wounds and pain on animals. Meanwhile, the majority of cases represents no danger or harm as many severe laws are in place to ensure humane treatment of animals. Furthermore, although these procedures could sometimes be dangerous, they actually aim to examine the effect of a product or a certain operation on a living being which will absolutely contribute to hundreds of life-saving remedies and treatments. According to the website Aalasfoundation, “Today’s children routinely receive a vaccine that provides a lifetime of protection from the disease. Untold millions of people around the world are healthy adults because of these vaccines, which were made possible through animal research”. Therefore, animal testing is not cruel, yet it is an absolute life-saving procedure.
2- Animals and humans are physiologically similar!
In the second place, many support their objection to animal testing by their difference to human beings and therefore give inadequate and inaccurate results. However, it’s just a fallacy and a stereotype just like the previous one. Scientists take the position that animals and humans are similar in many ways. Therefore, the use of animals in science makes an appropriate mean of research, and gives accurate findings. According to the website procon.org, “chimpanzees share 99% of their DNA with humans, and mice are 98% genetically similar to humans. All mammals, including humans, are descended from common ancestors, and all have the same set of organs (heart, kidneys, lungs, etc.) that function in essentially the same way with the help of a bloodstream and central nervous system”. Based on that, animal testing is a proper way of experimental verification. Moreover, it gives exact results especially in the medical field thanks to the remarkable similarity between animals and humans. For instance, to check the result of a daily consumption of a vitamin pill or a substance that leads to some specific side effects, we must test it on animals first before allowing people to use it safely. Therefore, animal testing should be required in science acknowledging the great similarity between animals and human beings.
3- If research abuses animal sources, we must realize that we acctually eat more than we use!
Ultimately, opponents of animal testing argue that the overuse of animals is the major cause of inadequate sources of animals. Although this might be true, I do find it a lame excuse and a poor justification. Is it true that scientific research abuses animal sources? What about food? According to researcher Dave Anderson, “while the figure above of 26 million animals used in research each year sounds frighteningly large, it is in fact quite small. Of those 26 million 95% are rodents (rats, mice etc), birds and fish, relatively few higher mammals are used. The human population of the United States eats about 9 billion chickens each year or more than 340 chickens for each animal used in research (3)”. Therefore, we can see exactly how the demand of food surpasses enormously the demand of animals in science. So then, the sources of animals used for scientific research is quite reasonable and rationalized. Besides, laboratories test on animals that have a short life-cycle and scattered in abundance. For instance, they use rats, mice, Guinea pigs or hamsters. Therefore, the use of animals in scientific research is harmless, essential and Irreplaceable.
As a conclusion, it is imperative to use animals in scientific research. This procedure provides a good quality of scientific findings, and contributes to the development of science. Although, many people oppose to animal testing, I personally stand for such experiments. We would certainly contribute to saving hundreds of lives thanks to this method of scientific exploration. In contrast, if the animal testing was banned, we will be sacrificing the future of science. Modern methods of scientific study are not only based on theories, but also on experimental verification that requires a living whole-body system; therefore, we cannot abandon the use of animals in science.
Further hypothesis: To which extent do ethical considerations and religious traditions affect the use of animals in scientific research?