ACriticalReviewofAnimalExperimentation

ByGabrielaUmanzor

InAnimalExperimentation,CindyMurthebookeditorputstogetherdifferentarticlesof
differentauthorsinonebookofanimalexperimentation.Shepresentsmanysmallarticlesthat
representdifferentcategoriesofanimalresearchandcruelty.Thisbookmainargumentisanimal
experimentationandhowanimalshavebeenmistreatedandmisusedwithridiculous
experiments.
ThefirstarticleIreadInAnimalExperimentationisAnimalTestingIsNotEssentialfor
MedicalResearchbyC.RayGreekandJeanSwingleGreek.C.RayGreekandJeanSwingle
Greekbegintheirarticlearguingthatanimaltestingisnotnecessaryandwasntnecessaryforbig
medicaladvancementsintechnologyormedications.Theirthreemainargumentsarepeoplewho
testonanimalswouldlikeeveryonetobelieveitsnecessary.Animalexperimentationdidnot
discoverthereasonsforheartdiseaseorhighbloodpressure.Animalexperimentationdidnot
makeadvancementsinsurgeryeither.Theybasethisresearchonknowingthisinformationsince
theyarefoundersofAmericanslivinglongerandbetter.
ForExample,C.RayGreekandJeanSwingleGreekarguepeoplewhodoanimal
researchbelieveitsnecessaryFrankTrullarepresentativefortheanimalresearchindustry,has
evenstated,everymajormedicaladvanceofthiscenturyhasdependedonanimalresearch
(25).Hebacksupwhathesaidandstatesinthisargumentthatwhatsomeonesaid.The
medicationsusedtotreatheartdiseaseandhighbloodpressureweredevelopeddespite
misleadingresultsofanimalexperiments(26).Thisquoteexplainsthatanimalresearchhad

nothingtodowiththediscoveryofmedicationforheartdiseaseandhighbloodpressure.This
quoteThefirstradialkeratotomieswereanimalexperimentationinducedcatastrophes(26).
Explainsthatanimalsurgeryforeyeswasbadonmiceitdidntworkatall.Theythoughtthey
hadperfecteditonrabbitsbutleftthefirsthumansblind.Theykeepmakingexamplesofhow
thatanimalresearchdidntfindthemostvitalmedicaladvancementswenowhaveor
medicationsandvaccines.
ThesecondarticleisAnimalTestingIsCruelandDoesNotBenefitMedicalResearchby
IngridNewkirk.IngridNewkirkisthecofounderandPresidentofPeopleforEthicalTreatment
ofAnimals(PETA).Shestartsthearticletellingastoryhowsomeonecalledinanimal
researchersandhowtheyleftmacaquemonkeysuselessoftheirarmsandhorrificscars.Ingrid
Newkirksargumentsareanimaltestsareunnecessary,ridiculous,andcausesuffering.She
basedherresearchonseeingthisfirsthandhappenandhavingtoremoveanimalsfromhorrific
situations.
IngridNewkirkmakesheropeningargumentexampleMillionsofanimalssuffer
throughstressfulandunnecessarytests(28)thisexampleshowsempathytoanimalsandthats
whosheis.MillionsofanimalssuffereverydayandyearAnimalsareburnedaliveincockpits
ofplans,explodedinweapontests,andforcedtoinhalepollutantsuntiltheychoketodeath
(29).Thereareridiculousstudiesthataremadeagainstanimalsforexampleratswerekilledby
beingfedhugedosesofLouisianahotsauce(30).Thatquoteshowshowridiculousandvery
horrificthingstheydotoanimalsbecausetheycan.Shebasesherresearchondiscoveringsome
ofthesestudiespeopledoonanimalsandcasesofanimalcruelty.

ThethirdarticleisChemicaltestingonAnimalsIsUnreliablebyAlixFano.Heisa
directoroftheCampaignforResponsibleTransplantationandtheauthorofLethalLaws:Animal
Testing,HumanHealthandEnvironmentalPolicy.AlixFanoargueschemicaltestingis
misleadingandextremelypainful.Histhreeopposingargumentsaretheyunreliable,painful,and
theyprofitalotofmoneyfromanimalexperimentation.Heisbasinghisresearchondoinghis
ownbycontactingorganizations.
AlixFanosupportshisargumentforunreliabilityforexampleMiceareusedinchemical
testingandareverydifferentfromhumansmakestheminadequateandunreliablesubjects
(65).Animalsgothroughpainfulexperiencesintheseexperimentsandtestedusingmethods
anddosesthatareoddswithreallifeconditions(67).Hesupportshislastclaimonprofitby
stating,moneyispower(69)hesaysthisbecausemoneymakestheworldgoround.People
lookawayandsodoesthegovernmentwithpayingfeesandanimaltestingmakesmoneyfor
companies.
ThefirstarticleofthebookthatIreviewedwasAnimaltestingIsNotEssentialfor
MedicalResearchtheauthorC.RayGreekandJeanSwingleGreekexplaintheirviewpointon
medicalresearchandhowitsnotessential.Theygointodepthhowanimaltestingdidntcreate
vaccinesormedicaltechnology.Thentheysaythatsurgeonsdidsurgeryonrabbitseyesfor
bettervision,whichisnowcalledLASIK.Theydidthiswithrabbitsanditblindedpeopleatfirst
butithelpedsurgeons.Itseemstomeheisbiasedinthisaspecthefirstsaysitsnotnecessarybut
itisaswellbecauseithelpedthemitwasntperfectbutithelped.Thiswasaweaknessinhis
argumentbecauseifhewantedittobestrongheshouldhaveputinhowrabbitshelpedand
surgeonsperfectedItlater.

SecondarticleAnimalTestingIsCruelandDoesNotBenefitMedicalResearchthe
authorIngridNewkirkfirstandforemostdevelopsherideaandthesis.SheexplainsthatAnimals
areputthroughpainfulexperimentsandtheysufferforunnecessarytesting.Shegoesintodepth
howshefeelsofhowtheysufferandhowshehasalotoffactshowtheyaretreated.Shemakes
herargumentsandexamplesineverysectionofherarticle.Shehasareallystrongarticle
becausesheincludesaresearcherresponsehowtheyseeanimals.Thismadeherarticlestrong
becausesheshowshowtheyseethemandscreamsaredisregardedandarejustcalled
defecatingmachines(33).Onethingthatdidmakethispartbiasalthoughwassheputaquotea
mansaid,Ivefinallystoppedtorturinganimals(33).Thisshowsbiasinawaybecauseone
momentsheshowshowmeantheyareandthenhowtheycanchangeintofeelingbad.Thiswas
ahugeweaknessinherarticlehowtheydothisforthebetterofmankindandmostdontcarefor
animalsandaredisrespectfultothem.
Finally,thelastarticleChemicalTestingOnAnimalsIsUnreliablethesiswasthatanimal
testswouldneverbereliable.AlixFanoarguesthatthatchemicaltestingisntthesameonmice
thanonahuman.Rabbitsaretestedonandhowtheyhaveproblemswiththesemethodsbecause
theirskinisdifferentandpeoplehavedifferentallergiesaswell.Hethengoesintospeakingof
safedoseshowtheycameupwithadifferentideahowsafeuseofexperimentation.Howsafeis
ittousearoundchildrenandthismadethisarticleandargumentweak.Itbecamebiasbecausehe
speakingofsolvingitandhowsafeisittousebeforechildrengethurt.
TheCriticalReviewofthesearticlesinAnimalExperimentationisinteresting.Theyare
notjustthesameauthorwritingit.Thesearedifferentarticlesintoonebookofanimal
experimentation.Theyshowtheissueshowanimalsaretreatedandthecruelty.However,allof

theauthorsIreadhadweakandbiasopinionsintheend.Ifeelliketheyallhavehopefor
humanityandthatpeoplecanchangeandthatitsokaytostilldoanimalexperimentation.Their
argumentsseemedfaultyandthatitsstrongbutintheenditendedweak.