Introduction
Imagine being isolated in a room, and you have no control over your life ultimately. You are not allowed to choose what to eat nor when to eat, and your life entirely is controlled by another person. Precisely, this is the life of an animal put in a laboratory. It is subjected to isolation, deprivation, and misery ( Hartung, 2019) . Besides the deprivation, these animals are then experimented on. The U.S law has permitted animals to be poisoned, burned, shocked, drowned, starved, brain-damaged, and addicted to drugs. No matter how trivial or painful the experiment is, it is allowed, and no painkillers are required ( Grimm, 2019) . Even when there are alternatives to be used instead of animals, the U.S law does not allow them to be used, and they are usually not used.
Against Humanity
When animals are experimented on, they get infected with diseases that they would never contract. For example, tiny mice grow massive tumors the size of their bodies. Kittens get to be blinded, and rats are made to suffer seizures. They are force-fed with chemicals, and repeated surgeries are conducted on their bodies ( Hartung, 2019) . Animal testing is being cruel to these animals. There are two primary alternatives to animal testing, and they are in silicon computer simulation and in vitro cell culture techniques ( Kojima, 2019) . However, some people claim that these are not reliable techniques; for example, the simulation uses data from previous animal experiments, and cell cultures usually require animal-derived products such as cells or serum. It is difficult to avoid using the product where animals have been experimented on
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Bad for the Environment
There are substantial environmental impacts that result from animal testing. During testing, there is a lot of air pollution, soil contamination, and water pollution. The air pollution is as a result of smoke coming from burning fossil fuel required to fuel the animal research institutions, which generally release sulphur dioxide in the air, thus making it toxic ( Wilkinson, 2019) . The presence of sulphur dioxide into the air results in global warming as well as acid rain, which then increases temperatures and causes droughts worldwide, thus making it difficult for animals to survive. When human beings breathe the same air, diseases such as cancer in the lungs and asthma are contracted. The various chemicals used by these facilities cause water and soil contamination.
Counter Claim
Animal testing has helped to improve the medicine and health industry since it allows researchers to find drugs as well as treatments needed to improve health ( Prior, 2019) . It is because of animal testing that many treatments have been made possible such as antibiotics, cancer, vaccines, and HIV drugs. The safety of drugs is guaranteed, and they do not affect human beings once they get exposed to the ( Wilkinson, 2019) . Since medications can be harmful to human beings, animal testing helps the researchers to assess their safety before they are taken to human beings. Therefore, social harm is significantly reduced, and lives are saved. As a result, the quality of life is improved dramatically since the drugs themselves save on lives.
Conclusion
Although animals get killed after they have been experimented in and others get injured while in captivity, there are tremendous benefits that have resulted in animal testing. For example, significant advances in medicine have been made possible by animal testing. Many life-changing discoveries have been made, such as vaccines and the invention of drugs that have improved the lives of people. Besides, it is difficult to find alternatives for animal testing, especially for fields such as medicine; thus, the continued need to use animal testing. However, there is a need for research facilities to look for ways they can minimize pollution in the environment.
References
Grimm, D. (2019). EPA plan to end animal testing splits scientists.
Hartung, T. (2019). Predicting toxicity of chemicals: software beats animal testing. EFSA Journal , 17 .
Kojima, H., Seidle, T., & Spielmann, H. (Eds.). (2019). Alternatives to Animal Testing: Proceedings of Asian Congress 2016 . Springer.
Prior, H., Casey, W., Kimber, I., Whelan, M., & Sewell, F. (2019). Reflections on the progress towards non-animal methods for acute toxicity testing of chemicals. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology , 102 , 30-33.
Wilkinson, M. (2019). The Potential of Organ on Chip Technology for Replacing Animal Testing. In Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change (pp. 639-653). Brill.
