Tags: Perceptions EssayTime Mangagement EssayShrek 1 Review EssaysPenulisan Tesis Gaya Ukm 2014Essays On CleanlinessProblem Solving Work BackwardsEssay Question 1950s AmericaWhat Is The Meaning Of Critical ThinkingControversial ThesisThe Introduction Of Your Research Paper Should Include
There is a moral blind spot in the treatment of animals that enable us to justify the cruelties for the perceived benefits of humans. They have lungs which breathe, hearts which beat, and blood that flows.
The support for animal testing is based largely on anecdote and is not backed up, we believe, by the scientific evidence that is out there.
Despite many decades of studying conditions such as cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, diabetes, stroke and AIDS in animals, we do not yet have reliable and fully effective cures.
This raises issues such as the ethics and humaneness of deliberately poisoning animals, thus harming them, for the sake of marketing a new cosmetic or household product.
The Humane Society of the United States promotes research methods that can potentially replace, reduce, or refine animal use so that animals experience less suffering.
A treatment to prevent scarring and loss of vision after glaucoma surgery will soon be tried on patients. Following successful studies on mice and rats, a vaccine for malaria is now being tested on people.
There is a wealth of evidence showing that animal “models” are not accurate and cannot be relied upon for safety testing and disease research.
It makes no sense to sacrifice future human health and well being by not using animals in research today.
In fact, it would be immoral and selfish not to use animals in research today, given the harm that could accrue to future generations if such research were halted.
The practice of using animals for testing has been a controversial issue over the past thirty years. The question is whether animal testing is morally right or wrong.
This paper will present both sides of this issue as well as my own opinion.