There are many other ways to advance research besides animal testing. Sadly, testing on animals has been going on for centuries. Scientist’s first began experimenting on animals in an attempt to learn as much as they could about how the brain and nerves of animals functioned. They also did public demonstrations on live animals where they would tie down the animal, cut them open, and pull out their organs for identification. The cycle then continued and animals started being used in experiments for vaccines, drugs, and cosmetics. Unfortunately, this issue affects not just the United States, but the entire world. One of the main problems is that animals are legal things, not legal persons. Therefore, they have no rights or laws protecting them. For as forward thinking as America is, it is actually behind the rest of the world when it comes to laws regarding animal testing.
Animals are living, breathing creatures that do not deserve to be tortured and experimented on. Can you imagine your beloved pet being strapped down to a table and injected with unknown chemicals? Or seeing a beautiful primate being poked, prodded, and tortured with no care for how that animal is suffering? When people think about testing on animals, their minds go right to mice and rats. Sadly, that is certainly not the case all the time. Even though mice and rats are used for the majority of experiments, scientists also use primates, cats, and dogs. People should be outraged that animal testing still continues in this day and age. Consumers need to educate themselves and be aware of what products are being tested on animals. One of the easiest ways to protest animal testing is to boycott the products and companies that continue to use this method. Hitting these companies where it hurts them the most, in their wallets. There are more effective and modern techniques available that makes animal testing inhumane, outdated, and inaccurate.
Methods
I utilized resources from TED.com, Twitter, High Schools Explora, All Animals Journal, the US National Library of Medicine, and a statistical website. The key words I used in my search were “animal testing,” “drug testing,” and “testing for cosmetics.” I did have some difficulty searching and finding information on TED.com, so I had to alter my search to also include key words such as “animal cruelty” and “animal treatment.” I did struggle in finding literature or media related to animal testing so I had to use the search term “animal cruelty” to locate a poem that would fit the criteria. I was actually surprised that I was not able to locate better articles and resources with the term “animal testing,” but was fortunate to find an article titled “The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation,” which contained an enormous amount of statistics and information.
Discussion
I used TED.com to search for a video that was at least ten minutes in length and was related to animal testing. Even though there were not many videos about testing on animals, I was able to locate a powerful talk related to the law and the ways in which animals are treated. The speaker was Steven Wise and the title of his video is, “Chimps have feelings and thoughts. They should also have rights.” It was important to learn that “legal things” are completely different than “legal persons.” “Right now, all non-human animals are legal things.” (Wise) Since animals are considered property, under the law, they do not have rights. However, this concept has been challenged in court and many are seeking to change the law as to what is considered to be a “legal thing.” “The Nonhuman Rights Project argues that drawing a line in order to enslave an autonomous and self-determining being that that’s a violation of equality.” (Wise)
The popular news source that I used was the National Library of Medicine and the social media post was from Twitter. The Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics had an article written by Aysha Akhtar titled, “The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation.” This new source was extremely beneficial and had a large amount of data related to the effectiveness of testing on animals as it relates to human drugs and disease. The author points out the many differences between the species genetics and physiology. “The resulting evidence suggest that the collective harms and costs to humans from animal experimentation outweigh potential benefits and that resources would be better invested in developing human-based testing methods.” (Akhtar) According to the article, testing on animals is not a good predictor of the outcome on humans. “Animal experimentation often significantly harms humans through misleading safety studies, potential abandonment of effective therapeutics, and direction of resources away from more effective methods.” (Akhtar) I also found an entry on Twitter from @peta which states, “Animal testing is pointless. 95% of drugs shown to be safe and effective in animals FAIL in humans.” PETA stands for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and their message is intended to discourage animal testing. Even though most responses were positive, several people wanted PETA to list their sources.
The peer-reviewed journal article I selected is written by Michael Sharp and titled, “It’s time to go Cruelty-free because they’re worth it: Nearly 40 countries have banned cosmetics testing on animals. What are we waiting for?” This enlightening article highlights that 37 countries have banned or limited cosmetics if they were tested on animals, with the European Union banning all cosmetics and ingredients that were newly tested on animals. According to the data source Speaking of Research Team, “In 2016, 820,812 animals were used in research testing.” It is also mentioned that since 2015, there has been a 7% rise in testing. So, why is the United States behind the rest of the world when it comes to animal testing? According to a poll taken in 2013, it showed that 73% of American voters would be in favor of legislation to end cosmetic testing on animals. There have also been almost 50 non-animal tests that are approved for use, with many more still being developed. “Scientists can now use laboratory models of human skin and eyes, created from human cells, to test the safety of ingredients and products such as mascara and shampoo-rather than testing them on rabbits, guinea pigs, mice or rats.” (Sharp) The United States has some of the brightest minds in the world and should be a trendsetter when it comes to ending animal testing and using the much more accurate alternative methods.
Connection to Literature/Media
PART 1: “Living Graves” is a poem written by one of the worlds greatest playwrights, George Bernard Shaw. There is no actual date when this poem was published, but his collection of poems are housed at The University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada. George Bernard Shaw was born in Dublin, Ireland and is the only person to ever be awarded both a Nobel Prize in Literature and an Oscar. He was a strict vegetarian as well as an animal rights activist. This is what inspired him to write the poem, “Living Graves.” This poem compares torturing animals by eating meat with war. He said that the only people who agreed with war would be those who tortured, killed, and ate animals. The poem suggests that if someone is comfortable with killing an animal, then they are able to kill a man in war too.
PART 2: “Living Graves” seems to show the conflict of sitting down on Sunday to eat a meal with your family, without wondering where your food really came from. The families pray for peace from war, but eat meat without thinking of the type of cruelty that animal went through. He says that if a butcher is able to slice the throat of a calf, then he would be able to slice the throat of his enemy during war. George Bernard Shaw also compares meat-eaters to crows when he says, “Like carrion crows, we live and feed on meat, regardless of the suffering and pain we caused in doing so.” This poem disagrees with the use of animals for sport or gain, which relates to animal testing. The testing of animals is used to gain knowledge, despite the type of cruelties that animal has to go through to get answers. There really is only one perspective of this poem, and that is clearly against any type of killing or torturing of defenseless animals. The author of this poem may be biased though, since he was a lifelong vegetarian.
Conclusion
Since animal testing has proven to be barbaric, obsolete, and unreliable, action must be taken immediately to improve the testing methods for drug and cosmetic safety.
Works Cited
- Wise, Steven. “Chimps Have Feelings and Thoughts. They Should Also Have Rights.” Ted, Ted, Mar. 2015, www.ted.com/talks/steven_wise_chimps_have_feelings_and_thoughts_they_should_also_have_rights#t-10611.
- Peta. “Animal Testing Is Pointless. Pic.twitter.com/CgLdmFeRRf.” Twitter, Twitter, 7 Jan. 2019, twitter.com/peta/status/1082405775643942912.
- Akhtar, Aysha. “The flaws and human harms of animal experimentation” Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics : CQ : the international journal of healthcare ethics committees vol. 24,4 (2015): 407-19.
- Sharp, Micheal. “It’s Time to Go Cruelty-Free.” The Humane Society of the United States, 2017, www.humanesociety.org/news/its-time-go-cruelty-free.
- Richards, Jennie. “George Bernard Shaw Poem, ‘We Are The Living Graves of Murdered Beasts.’” Humane Decisions, 18 Jan. 2016, www.humanedecisions.com/george-bernard-shaw-poem-we-are-the-living-graves-of-murdered-beasts/.
- “US Statistics.” Speaking of Research, Speaking of Research, 27 Nov. 2018, speakingofresearch.com/facts/statistics/.
