Animals & Science

Are animals truly needed for research?

Background Information

Based on my research, animal testing is needed for research. Without animal testing, many more lives would have been lost. The animals used for testing are similar to humans in many ways, making the research more accurate. Many people say to just replace animals with computers, but if we did replace animals with computers, that would limit the research, making the drugs tested not accurate. Researchers have already tried replacing animals with computers, and that did not work. Medicines that were used on animals raised cancer patients life expectancy up 10.9%. That is years added to their lives. Testing with animals means many test subjects that aren't as stubborn as humans. But, there are adoption services put in place to help research animals get adopted. Many people already own research animals as pets. If the animals do have to be put down, it is done so in the most humane way possible.
Big image

Pros of Animal Research

  • learning new things we never knew before
  • shorter life span, not much of a waste
  • unlimited number of test subjects
  • we are using under 1 million animals for research
  • life saving vaccines have been tested on animals first
  • we CAN research on animals without harming them

Animal Research Doesn't Kill

Animal research kills way less animals than that of animals for food, by accident, and for sport. Millions more are killed for food than the animals that are killed in research. Also, the animals used annually by the US has gone down over a million animals since the peak of animal research which was over two million.

Big image

Cons of animal Research

  • 9/10 drugs tested on animals fail to work on humans
  • medicines passing animal testing aren't necessarily safe
  • animals differ from humans greatly making research inaccurate
  • animals suffer horrible pain and suffering
  • about 937 chimpanzees are held captive annually for research purposes in US alone

Why some people don't like animal testing

Some people don't approve of animal testing because Religious traditions tell us to be merciful to animals, so we should not cause them suffering by experimenting on them. But, the bible says that humans have power over all the animals, so we can do what we want to them. Some people also say that many animals are killed very cruelly. That is not true. When the animals do have to be put down, it is done in the most humane way possible. Also, researchers don't kill all the animals they test on, only the ones that they have to take vital organs out of and those of which that can't live on. For those animals that can survive to live a longer life, there are adoptions that can be arranged for people to keep the experimented animals.

Pro Animal Research pictures

final thoughts

In conclusion, animal testing is needed for research because of many reasons. For instance, animals are really close to humans anatomy wise. Cancer patients life expectancy has risen almost 11% because of animal tested products. There are millions and millions more animals killed for food than that of research. Also, we are using under 1,000,000 animals for research when the peak was much over 2,000,000 animals used. This means that we would be able to keep using animals for research. Animal testing is needed for research.
Big image

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. 8 Dec. 2015.


Americans for Medical Progress. "Medical Progress Depends on Animal Research." Animal Experimentation. Ed. Susan C. Hunnicutt. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "Animal Research Means Medical Progress." 2012. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 8 Dec. 2015.


"Animal Research FAQs." Animal Research FAQs. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Dec. 2015.

"Animal Testing Not Only Saves Human Lives, But Other Animal Lives As Well." The Proactionary Transhumanist. N.p., 08 Feb. 2014. Web. 15 Dec. 2015.


"Animal Testing." ProConorg Headlines. Ed. Kambiz Akhavan and Tracy DeFrancesco. ProCon, 27 Aug. 2015. Web. 09 Dec. 2015.


Bekoff, Marc. "Use of Chimpanzees in Scientific Research Should Be Banned." Animal Experimentation. Ed. Susan C. Hunnicutt. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "Is Chimpanzee Research Necessary? No, Say Many Scientists." Psychology Today (25 Feb. 2012). Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 8 Dec. 2015.


Ben Goldacre, "Animal Research Study Shows Many Tests Are Full of Flaws," Theguardian.com, Jan. 22, 2010


"Campaign(s) for Animal Testing." VCD Special Topic D. N.p., 12 Nov. 2013. Web. 15 Dec. 2015.


Holder, Tom. "US Statistics." Speaking of Research. Word Press, 20 Mar. 2008. Web. 10 Dec. 2015.


"Marmoset Monkeys in an Animal Research Facility - Animal Testing - ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2015.


"Marmoset Monkeys in an Animal Research Facility - Animal Testing - ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2015.


Morell, Virginia. "Animal Minds." National Geographic. National Geographic, Mar. 2008. Web. 10 Dec. 2015.


Mulder, Guy. "Rats and Mice Are Important for Cancer Research." Animal Experimentation. Ed. Susan C. Hunnicutt. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "The Next Rodent Model." Drug Discovery & Development (8 Apr. 2011). Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 8 Dec. 2015.


"Pro Animal Testing Billboard - Animal Testing - ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2015.


" Survivors Campaign Promotes Animal Research to Aid Animals." Survivors Campaign Promotes Animal Research to Aid Animals. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Dec. 2015.


"Vivisection Painting from 1832 - Animal Testing - ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Dec. 2015.


Walsh, Peter D. "Protecting Apes Could Backfire." New York Times 27 Sept. 2015: 5(L). Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 8 Dec. 2015.