Mayberry 1

Julia Mayberry English 114 Professor Batty December 1, 2013 Yes, for Vivisection! Vivisection is a controversial issue that is debated through out the entire world. Vivisection, defined by Merriam Webster Dictionary, as The cutting of or operation on a living animal usually for physiological or pathological investigation; broadly: animal experimentation especially if considered to cause distress to the subject. This subject is controversial because it not only invests an animals body with diseases, but if the disease is not cured, then the animal could face fatal consequences. People tend to lean towards the side that considers vivisection, or animal testing, which is immoral and wrong. Although scientists attempt to, Minimize the pain and distress experienced by animals in laboratories, explains the American Antivivisection Society, people still do not feel pleased that the acts are occurring. Evidently, when it comes down to the facts, most people, when thinking about it logically, see why animal testing is necessary in more than one way. Vivisection may not seem to be morally correct but it is necessary for the human race to continue using it because of the accuracy animals provide. Rather than using computer simulations, Vivisection brings advances within the field of medicine, and lastly brings forth more surgical opportunities. Computers are a very useful piece of technology that helps students finish homework, keep families and friends in touch, and helps scientists advance throughout the medical field. Although computer simulations can push medicine to higher levels, computers cannot accurately

Mayberry 2

provide a simulation that is reliable enough for release to the public. Computer modeling plays an important part in the research process, however its capacity to replace the use of animals is limited, Speaking of Research; According to this source, although computers are intelligent and lead to correct answers, they do not match the level of accuracy that an actual animal could provide. Computers do not provide the same level of exactitude since an animals body has an incredibly similar composition to a humans body. Computers can provide a simulation although unfortunately simulations are obviously not as trustworthy as having an actual animal to watch transform. As was stated, computers do play a large role in the animal testing process, but they are still very limited with their performance. Some activists against animal testing may say that computers are faster and cost a fraction of what animal testing costs. Although that statement has some truth behind it, it still does not come to terms with the superiority an animal has over a machine. Seeing the results on a living thing is easier to understand and predict rather than seeing it on a screen. If meaningful alternatives existed, companies could save hundreds of millions of dollars in facilities and personnel costs, -Poset. As a veterinarian of three decades Poset is a firm believer in the fact that if there was a more positive and efficient way to test, then it would be used. Animal testing is also important because it keeps medicine safe and could help someone in need of heeling. Imagine living a life in which medicine never existed, going everyday without a small pill to ease a headache, or an injection to put one to sleep before a surgery. Without animals to test on, it would not be safely approved by the Federal Drug Administration, also known as the FDA. Without the FDAs approval, medicine would never be consumed by humans. Animal studies continue to be necessary for advancing human and animal health and have played a vital

Mayberry 3

role in virtually every major medical advance[ment], -Poset. Poset encourages the idea that medicine would not exist without using vivisection to continue improving and discovering new substances. He states that every advancement, including medicine, came about through the process of using animals to test these drugs. This process provides enough security to get by the FDA and into millions of medicine cabinets all around the world. Animals provide the luxury of modern medicine availability. Animal activists may protest by saying that most medicine approved by the FDA, due to success in animals, usually fails to work on humans. Though there might be a point there, the medical advances vivisection has produced is well worth the cost of the failures to continuously improve the medicine. Every failed medicine only leads to new ideas, improvements, and helps scientist work out the kinks. If you sincerely wish to eliminate the need for animal research, put down your picket signs, learn about the subject and invent solutions, -Poset. He is a strong believer and encourages animal activists to put their picket signs down, stop complaining, and find a solution to their problem. Without knowing what the real issues are, there is no way to find a real solution. Medicine is not only used for small distresses, but it can aid surgeries. Although medicine may seem possible to live without, especially for uses of small headaches or colds, most people come to a point in their life where they need to endure an important surgery that is possibly life threatening if it is not treated. Surgical operations are performed only for extreme cases and they tend to save a humans life and bring them comfort. Opposition to all animal testing would require a life without drugs, vaccines, painkillers, anesthetics and surgery, -Poset. Most people have a common reason to not test on animals and that is because it seems inhumane, but as Poset explains, if there were no testings on animals

Mayberry 4

then surgeries would not exist. In the quote, the list of medical necessities to live an easier, longer life is a relative factor that seems impossible to live without. These all include surgeries of all genres of procedures that are preformed. Especially in this modern time, taking animal experimentation out of the equation and not having the opportunity to learn about new surgeries does not seem like a world people will ever live in. Humans would only be taking a step back in the evolutionary world without exploring the advancement of surgeries. Surgeries would not be allowed because it is a regulation that it has to be tested on an animal before it is used on a human, this is just the standard all surgeries are held to. Doctors put themselves in a high risk position if there is a mishap during the procedure. These accidents, due to lack of knowledge, can lead to a fatal surgery. Some activists may say that animal testing is only used out of tradition and not because it is the best option. Vivisection is not exactly tradition, but it is a requirement when getting it passed by the government, Government regulations around the world require that new drugs, vaccines and surgical implants first be tested in animals for potential toxic reactions, -Poset. Not being intoxicated with ill-prepared drugs is a possible and deadly consequence. It may seem sad to put animals through that, but unless we have human volunteers, then there is really nothing that can replace it. Although it is disheartening to put them at risk for our lives, it seems most logical to put simple animals through the regiment. Animal experimentation seems to be one element this modern world cannot live without. Vivisection may not seem to be morally correct but the human race is destined to continue using it because it is more accurate that computer simulations, it brings advances in medicine, and includes furthering surgical opportunities. As animal activists insist, it may be time consuming and costly, but truly, nothing else is comparable to vivisection. It is best to have

Mayberry 5

animal testings to make sure medicine or surgical procedures are safe for public use and no one is poisoned with deadly toxins due to lack of thorough testing. Although animal testings are aided with computers, they just do not have similar bodily functions as a human and therefore it is unrealistic to replace it entirely over an animal. Over all, vivisection is necessary to continue moving forward and in result, animal testing saves millions of lives.

Mayberry 6

Works Cited American Anti-Vivisection Society. "Animal Research Is Unethical and Scientifically Unnecessary." Animal Experimentation. Ed. Susan C. Hunnicutt. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "Problems with Animal Research." 2011. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 3 Dec. 2013. Merriam Webster. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 09 Dec. 2013. Poste, George. "Alternative Testing Cannot Replace Animal Experimentation." Animal Experimentation. Ed. Ronnie D. Lankford, Jr. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2009. At Issue. Rpt. from "Animal Testing a Necessary Research Tool, For Now." Arizona Republic 3 Sept. 2006. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 3 Dec. 2013.

Speaking of Research. "It Is Not Possible to Completely Replace Animals in Medical Research." Animal Experimentation. Ed. Susan C. Hunnicutt. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "Alternatives?" Opposing Viewpoints in Context. W eb. 14 Nov. 2013.