Animal Experimentation for Medicine
By Isabella Merem
Killing animals for human benefits is inhumane. Animals should have the same rights as humans do. It is not fair to hurt them to help humans.
There are alternatives to testing animals. In vitro tests can replace the need for animals. These tests are done outside of organisms or cells.
How else are scientists supposed to find cures and treatments for deadly diseases? In fact, more animals die because humans hunt and eat them. If animal experimentation for medicine is considered wrong, then all humans might as well become vegetarians! Also, in vitro tests cannot fully replace the need for animals. In order to get accurate computer results, scientists need to test animals because there are body systems that have not yet been found or identified. For example, scientists may find that a drug has done damage to the heart, but not the liver. Only by conducting an animal test can researchers find this (Woods 43).
Call to Action
"How Do Animals Benefit from Animal Research." The National Academies Press. National Academy of Sciences, 2016. Web. 23 Feb. 2016.
Sepahban, Lois, and Seth M. Walker. Animal Testing: Lifesaving Research vs. Animal Welfare. North Mankato, Minnesota: Capstone, 2015. Print.
"Should Animals Be Used for Scientific or Commercial Testing?" ProCon.org. ProCon.org, 2016. Web. 16 Feb. 2016.
"Surgical Advancements." The National Academies Press. National Academy of Sciences, 2016. Web. 23 Feb. 2016.
Woods, Geraldine. Animal Experimentation and Testing: A Pro/con Issue. Springfield, NJ: Enslow, 1999. Print.