Martinez

Adriana Martinez
Professor Vyvial
Comp 1 1301
July 3, 2016
The Good and Bad of Animal Testing
For every story there are two sides, one being good and the other being bad. Just like any
other story, the subject of animal testing has two sides as well. It is your decision on which side
you end up taking. One side is accepting that animals are being used for testing due to it have
provided many medical breakthroughs in humans and in animals. The other side believes that it
is not right and is inhumane to the animals by force feeding and testing the products on them to
see what the outcome will be, sometimes resulting in death.
The pro side consists of various points that are clearly proven, from being a medical
advancement to animals being treated with care by veterinarians. A point was brought out about
the medical advancements, The California Biomedical Association states that nearly every
medical breakthrough in the last 100 years has resulted directly from research using animals
(CBRA). Many cures for cancer have been created thanks to the testing and researching on
animals. If medication were to be given out without having any kind of trial beforehand, it could
result in harm or death of humans in a wider scale. Chimpanzees are used to test on, they are the
most like humans since they share 99% of their DNA with humans. Testing on the most closely
related mammal to us can help come up with many more advancements and medicine to help us
with our sicknesses. Testing on animals has also saved other animals by finding a cure for
cancers, infections, and diseases for your beloved household pet. Rabies, distemper, feline
leukemia, infectious hepatitis virus, tetanus, anthrax, and canine parvo virus are all illnesses that

Martinez

could have had no prevention or solution if there were no testing on animals. The law says that
the animals being tested on must be cared for by a veterinarian and have a significant amount of
space to live in. They are provided with clean food and water due to the law as well as the animal
being a better test subject if healthy. Mice and rats are a great source to get information on for
most products. They have the shortest lifespan, three to five years, so they can be easily tracked
from the medication given to them if there are any birth defects or anything wrong with the
product. By having many different mice around you can give each one a different dosage to see
which is the one that works. They also reproduce quickly so they can see how the drug affects, if
at all, future generations.
On the opposing side of animal testing is the con, consisting of the way the animals are
being treated cruelly and inhumanely to being poor test subjects. Many people disagree with
doing research and testing on animals due to them being treated immorally. Forcing feeding an
animal and having them inhale a substance for experimentation is thought to be inhumane.
Physical restraint is put upon animals to force them to ingest the substance needed for testing.
Many animals are kept away from food and water because the testing alone is expensive enough.
Most animals that have undergone testing have died by carbon dioxide asphyxiation or the
breaking of their necks. In order to get the infamous tear free shampoo, rabbits were held with
their eyelids wide open with clips. This process went on for numerous days, to be able to test
different products in their eyes that would not cause redness or tears. You would think that cruel
and unusual punishment would apply to animals as well but many species do not have protection
and support behind them. The AWA does not cover rats, mice, fish, and birds which comprise
around 95% of the animals used in research (Hasting). Another point is that animals make poor
test subjects due to having different cells and being completely different from the body of a

Martinez

human. They react differently from humans because we handle drugs differently than them. Not
all of the drugs that get verified as safe are necessarily okay for humans to use as the incident
of 10,000 babies being born with major deformities from the sleeping pill thalidomide that
women were taking in the 1950s. When tested on animals, none of the offspring resulted in
deformities until the drug was given at a high dosage. Ninety-four percent of drugs that pass
animal tests fail in human clinical trials (Understanding Animal Research). This making a lot of
the drugs that were considered safe and that worked on animals to completely fail when given to
the public to try out. Testing is also more expensive than any other method of finding a way for
the product to work. Scientists spend thousands in governments funds on research to test on
animals when there is a cheaper alternative.
Although there are two sides to every subject or story, this one shows the pro being
about the medical industry, proving points as to having found cures for cancer and having
provided the fundamentals for medical breakthroughs that help the little things like an infection
on a small cut. The animals are also being well taken care of and have the appropriate amount of
space along with routine visits from a veterinarian and having clean food and water available. On
the opposing side, it is said that they are not provided with enough water or food and sometimes
go completely without it. Furthermore, there is not a significant amount of space available for
them to properly roam around and to be healthy on a physical scale. On this side is also the point
brought up of them not being suitable testing subjects due to not having the same anatomy as
humans. On the contradicting side it is said that testing on chimpanzees is accurate because they
are 99% compatible to humans when speaking in terms of DNA.
In contrast between the two sides to this particular subject, they both prove points that are
exceptionally valid. Whether you are for or against it, there is an argument that is worth the

Martinez
headache. One side seeing the positive side to animal testing and the other seeing the negative
side to this subject. Whichever side you choose to see this particular subject, there are still two
sides to each and every story or subject that is out there.

Martinez
Works Citied
California Biomedical Research Association, "CBRA Fact Sheet: Why Are Animals Necessary
in Biomedical Research?," ca-biomed.org (accessed Oct. 15, 2013)
The Hastings Center, "Fact Sheet: Animals Used in Research in the U.S.,"
animalresearch.thehastingscenter.org (accessed Oct. 15, 2013)
Understanding Animal Research, "Nine Out of Ten Statistics Are Taken Out of Context,"
understandinganimalresearch.org.uk, Jan. 23, 2013