Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Background and introduction
Research involving animals has for a very long time raised intense debate. Different individuals have varying opinions regarding whether conducting animal research is acceptable and justified. The discussion surrounding animal testing consists of two positions. Some individuals are in favor of using animals in research while others are against animal testing. Those who support the use of animals in carrying out research or experiments base their arguments around medical and scientific benefits that arise in using animals. They strengthen their arguments by giving examples of medical research charities, selected governments, and other patient groups that support the use of animals in experimenting or conducting research. They continue to add that animal testing offers a significant contribution especially in helping individuals to comprehend some of the vital biomedical discoveries. Such discoveries include the establishment and development of numerous therapies and other preventive treatments like organ transplantation, antibiotics, vaccines, and insulin. They argue that most modern medicines have managed to realize a considerable development as a result of using animals to carry out different tests and research. Other individuals who support the use of animals in research and testing base their arguments on scientific and ethical grounds. They assert that animal testing must not come to an end since the process helps in alleviating individual suffering and also serves as a means of advancing scientific knowledge (Ferdowsian 476).
On the other hand, individuals who advocate for the abolishment of animal research and testing also base their arguments around scientific and ethical grounds. Most of the organizations that are against this practice raise a lot of concerns especially on the validity of conducting animal research. Such organizations call for an immediate abolishment of animal testing. They believe that outcomes generated by biomedical experiments involving the use of animals cannot be transferred to human beings. People who are against this practice have less focus on the much-needed scientific grounds. However, they base their arguments on ethical grounds. They do not see the essence or reasons why human beings should use animals in conducting research or tests although they do not benefit. This is also from the fact that the whole process causes a lot of suffering and pain to the animals. This is the main reason why such individuals or organizations fight for an immediate end of such practices. They do not consider the medical and scientific progress that might occur out of this process. Apart from those who are against or those in favor of animal testing, other people do not seem to either support or go against the use of animals in carrying out experiments. Since not every research involving animals contributes to medical progress, some people would want to have a strong understanding of whether animal testing is justifiable or necessary in one way or the other. As a result, such people may develop concerns about some situations where basic research may fail to portray the usefulness of knowledge that results from that research. Other people assert that the use of animals in carrying out research is often regarded as the only method of providing answers to given research questions. Others associate this practice with the inability of researchers to develop other scientific methods of conducting research that does not necessarily involve the use of animals. Therefore, this paper aims to discuss the arguments that support animal research, especially for medical purposes. The paper also includes some opposing arguments that explain why animal research for medical purposes should stop (Guither 44).
Arguments in support of animal research for medical purposes
For a considerably long time, research or experiments that involve the use of animals have contributed significantly towards the establishment and development of advanced methods of offering medical treatments. This is one of the reasons why many scholars advocate for the use of animal testing. This practice provides an opportunity for the researchers to continue finding out appropriate ways of alleviating the current ailments. At the same time, address emerging cases of new ailments and diseases. It is possible to find answers to questions through animal research. During the first half of the 19th century, there were a lot of debilitating diseases that were believed to be caused by viral and bacterial infections. During this time, the majority of the physicians were not aware of the root causes of such ailments. They considered the ailments to be caused by derangements found inside the body of human beings. The proof associating such diseases with external micro-organisms was boosted by the work of Louis Pasteur, a French chemist. Through the assistance of his contemporaries, Louis Pasteur managed to study infectious diseases that were affecting domestic animals. Pasteur believed that beer got spoilt as a result of being contaminated and this helped him to conclude that, diseases such as anthrax and cholera were also caused by micro-organisms (Paul 198).
To help in testing this hypothesis, Pasteur analyzed the content found in a sick chicken gut. He managed to isolate causative microbes and later on developed an organism culture. A healthy chicken contracted cholera after subjecting it to cultural samples. By so doing, Pasteur managed to identify the organism responsible for the disease. This advancement helped the researchers to develop vaccines that could be used in preventing other chickens from suffering the same disease. This experience also helped Louis Pasteur to understand that doctors can manage to induce patient immunity against diseases. They can achieve this by administering a weaker culture on the bacteria that cause a given disease. In similar research carried out on guinea pigs and rabbits, the researcher managed to eliminate the microbes that cause diseases like anthrax and later on developed a strong vaccine that could provide immunity against the disease. All this information that was obtained from animal testing helped to explain that micro-organisms are responsible for most of the diseases. These diseases could be prevented by carrying out immunization. Such experiments could not be conducted on human beings. This explains why animal research is vital for medical purposes (Guither 31).
Guither (38) adds that researchers have also managed to establish the causes and the corresponding vaccines for many diseases that are highly infectious. Examples of such diseases include; rabies, poliomyelitis, rubella, mumps, tetanus, diphtheria, measles, tuberculosis, and whooping cough. It should be understood that the successful investigation of such diseases has to a larger extent relied on animal testing and experimentation. Many scientists have been able to identify the main micro-organism responsible for a given disease and later on administer these microbes to the affected animals. By so doing, the researchers easily ascertain whether a given animal is suffering from the disease in question. Guither adds that the most recent achievement in research involving animals is the vaccine developed by scientists to provide immunity against Hemophilus influenza. The latter causes meningitis. For a very long time, this disease caused severe damage to the brain or even the death of close to 800 children in the United States each year. Before the introduction of an effective vaccine, all the earlier vaccines offered short-lived immunity. However, the researchers were able to develop an effective vaccine through animal testing. The vaccine was successfully tested in small animals like mice and rats and proved highly powerful in offering immunity against diseases. To date, the vaccine is experiencing high demands and its use is daily. It is important to comprehend that both the United Kingdom and the United States witness a drastic reduction in the number of Hib infections. This took place two months after the vaccine was introduced. Thus, it is important to acknowledge the contribution of animal research. The research has enabled scientists to develop new vaccines for preventing highly infectious diseases and facilitated the faster development and advancement of antibiotic and antibacterial drugs. For example, despite the introduction of aseptic solutions in the US and Europe, there were very many death cases caused by serious infection. Many women also died as a result of contracting puerperal sepsis while men died from diseases like lobar pneumonia. This trend was halted after the introduction of sulfonamide drugs. There was a considerable reduction in death cases. For example in the year 1960, the number of mothers succumbing to puerperal sepsis was below five per 100,000 mothers. Similarly, the number of men dying from lobar pneumonia was below six per 100,000 men. According to Fischer (176), people who advocate for the use of animal experiments assert that animal testing helps to provide consumers with safe products. This process also provides an assurance such all products to be consumed by human beings are effective.
Arguments against animal research
Individuals who are against animal research base their arguments on several issues. Firstly, these individuals believe that animal research is not only inhumane. Nonetheless, it is also an unreliable method of conducting research. The opponents argue that some of the medications that seem to be successful on animals cannot generate similar results when applied to human beings. A very good example is aspirin. This medication is a very reliable pain reliever when used on human beings. However, the same medication can turn out to be very toxic when consumed by small animals like mice and rats. Other drugs like the clinical trial involving a man and an elephant produced successful results when tried on the elephants. The same drug was found to have very adverse effects when tried on human beings wherein in some extreme cases; it failed some organs or death of a person (McSharry et al 521). This shows that human beings and animals do not share any direct association. This explains why some medications produce good results when tried on animals and fail to work in human beings. Similarly, some medications will work well on human beings, but fail to produce the desired results on animals. The opponents of animal research add that animal research cannot arrive at accurate findings because of the high level of stress subjected to animals when carrying out the process. Additionally, animals spend almost their entire lives in cages. As a result, the animals may develop unusual behaviors like biting and running. All these factors hinder researchers from having conclusive data when carrying out animal experiments.
Secondly, those against the use of animal testing argue that the welfare and health of the animals subjected to such practices are much more beneficial compared to the knowledge acquired by the scientist. Although some scientists support the use of animals in conducting research, they are also against the use of animals especially under circumstances where animals are not used for medical progress. They assert that the government should outlaw activities that make use of animals for other activities (Hayhurst 30).
Conclusion
From the above analysis, it can be found that different individuals have varying views about the use of animals in experiments. Animal testing has provided a significant boost in the effort of many scientists. They have tried to develop improved ways of offering improved medical treatment. In addition, it is worthy to note that animal testing has helped to find an appropriate cure for deadly diseases such as whooping cough measles, and tuberculosis. As a result, many deaths have been reduced hence animal testing is necessary. However, it should also be noted that animal testing is associated with negative effects like increased levels of pain and suffering subjected to the animals. Based on this fact, Fox (178) explains that there is a great need of finding alternative ways of carrying out experiments for instance through computer simulation.
References
Ferdowsian, Hope. Human And Animal Research Guidelines: Aligning Ethical Constructs With New Scientific Developments. Bioethics 25.8 (2011): 472-478. Print.
Fischer, Kristian. Testing Bans And Marketing Bans Under The Cosmetics Directive. European Food & Feed Law Review 4.3 (2009): 172-184. Print.
Fox, Michael. The Case for Animal Experimentation: An Evolutionary and Ethical Perspective. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986. Print.
Guither, Harold. Animal Rights: History and Scope of a Radical Social Movement. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1998. Print.
Hayhurst, Chris. Animal Testing: The Animal Rights Debate. New York: Rosen Pub. Group, 2000. Print.
McSharry, Gavin et al. Were Monocytes Responsible For Initiating The Cytokine Storm Clinical Trial. Clinical & Experimental Immunology 162.3 (2010): 516-527. Print.
Paul, Ellen. Why Animal Experimentation Matters: The Use of Animals in Medical Research. New Brunswick: Transaction Publ, 2001. Print.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.