For Animal Rights In this essay I will be discussing the cruel acts of animal torture and testing. Animals have been tortured to death by substances such as drugs, cosmetics, diseases, tobacco, alcohol, detergent and other poisons. Do people have the right to do what ever they like to perfectly healthy animals? Should scientists do tests on animals if no new information is going to be gained? Cosmetic companies use animal tests to protect themselves against possible lawsuits. If they were sued for liability then they can back themselves up by saying that the product was 'tested for safety'. How placing a piece of lipstick in the eye of a rabbit to see if it is safe for the consumer doesn't …show more content…
Their are two tests that I would like to tell you about. One of the tests is called the Draize Eye-Irritancy Test. This was designed to measure how harmful a substance was to human eyes by using rabbits eyes. This test was developed in 1944 by the U.S Food and Drug Administration. They use six rabbits for each substance that they want to test. The technician places the substance into the lower eye of the rabbit, then the rabbits eyes are then examined at different times. The technician records signs of damage, such as redness, swelling, inflammation and clouding of the cornea. The technician then uses a scoring scheme to say how much the substance has irritated the eye. This test is unreliable because rabbits eyes are very different to human eyes. Rabbits have a third eyelid and have a slower blink reflex, a less effective tearing mechanism and a thinner cornea than humans. These make a rabbits eyes much more sensitive to humans eyes and less sensitive to others. If this is the result then why do it in the first place. The rabbit may suffer from blindness, sometimes death and always pain. The Draize test proves no information apart from that the products that were tested irritate a rabbits eyes. The other test I would like to tell you about is the Lethal Dose 50 Percent (L50) Test. This test is to estimate how poisonous that chemical would be to
Is it ethical for animals to have the same rights as humans? During this paper I will present the views of both sides. I will try my best to give the reader a chance to come to there own unbiased conclusion. I will talk about the key areas of animal ethics. I will present the facts and reasoning behind the arguments over Animal cruelty, testing, hunting, and improper housing. My conclusion will hopefully bring us closer to answering many of the question surrounding “Animal Rights and Ethics”.
Doesn’t it kill you to see a movie and see an animal get killed or just hurt in it? Good thing that’s all special effects. Back in the day, around 1966, movies didn’t always use special effects. Khartoum, a movie based on a holy war in the Sudan desert, directed by Basil Dearden and Eliot Elisofon, used horses a great deal, but did not use the special effects in order to not hurt the animals. Many horses died in the making of this movie, as well as others, even including a major hit, Ben-Hur. Today, there are many activist groups that fight for and about the unfair treatment and protection for animals in everyday life. The People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is one of these groups. PETA was founded in
According to Gallup.com a third of Americans want animals to have the same rights as people. The Animal Bill of Right implies that animals have the right to be free from exploitation and cruelty, It also prohibits laboratory animals to be used for research. Animals will also have healthy diets and medical care. It will also provide them with an environment that satisfies their needs. I do not believe we need a Bill of Rights for animals. This would not only be extreme but it will affect human culture, medical research, and cost of food
Throughout history, humans have utilized nonhuman animals for the benefit of mankind. This tendency increased as civilization developed, and presently, necessitated by staggering population growth and technological progress, human use of animals has skyrocketed. We eat them, we breed them, we use them as test subjects. Some people have begun to question the ethics of it all, sparking a debate on animal treatment and whether or not they have rights. In a paper on the subject, Carl Cohen lays out his definition of rights, explains their relationship with obligations, and uses these ideas to present the argument that manifests clearly in his piece’s title, “Why Animals Have No Rights”. THESIS
Today, the discussions about the protection of the animal’s rights have received the attention of many people, many countries in the world. A lot of actions have been made by animal right activists to influence the world. Alex Epstein and Yaron Book, both authors of the “The Evil of Animal ‘Right’,” argue animal right activists use too much violence on their action, which is considered going against the law. Then, the authors give a lot of evidence to prove testing animals are extinct, but using animals for testing gives us new vaccines which make our lives better. Without animals for testing, how can scientists find out the vaccine for diseases? Animal right groups are making many effects to Huntingdon Life Sciences.
Introduction, animals that are being tested safety of their products that’s been a subject of an intense debate for over 10 years. While, a lot of people that alleged animals, the remained animals are being subjugated by the research cosmetics companies all over the country/all over the world. Even though, the scientists frequently profit from animal research, I don’t think all the suffering, the pain, and the animals dying are worth just trying find out the human benefits from the products.
Is the human race ready to sacrifice lives in order to protect the welfare of animals? Is the human race ready to justify trading human lives for animal lives? Even though we should make every effort ensure that animals are not wantonly harmed in research, animals certainly do not have the same rights as humans do. Many animal rights activists condemn research on animals, citing that it is inhumane. But prohibiting research on animals would be even more inhumane. Research on animals has eradicated many diseases and saved the lives of millions, and discontinuing doing so will generate disastrous consequences. Because of extremely advantageous health advancements that have benefited, and will continue to benefit, the lives of human beings, research on animals should continue to be allowed.
I have read an understood the description given above concerning the test. I volunteer to
Every year, in Europe and in North America tens of millions of animals are used for scientific research, for the testing of drugs and consumer goods as well as for educational purposes including dissection, and surgery practice. The Draize test and the LD50 (lethal dose 50 percent) in particular have been criticized for their animal cruelty and have gained increasing resistance on the part of the animal liberationists and the general public. The Draize test, which involves testing the acute acidity of cosmetics and household products on rabbits’ eyes, and the LD50, in which the toxicity of a substance by determining the dose required to kill fifty percent of the test group within fourteen days, however, are merely two example of the cruelty experienced by animals in biomedical research laboratories.
Seems rhetorical, but the fact is animals live through this everyday, without even given the choice. As humans, we establish our authority among all living beings, but for what reasons? Are humans better than all other species? Or is it true that we should hold a precedence over nonhuman animals? The ultimate question then remains, should animals have as much or equal to the same rights as humans? Their are endless arguments for and against this question, and many sub arguments that go hand in hand with each side. In this paper, I will discuss the definition of what animal rights entails and expand on the history that developed it’s meaning. Furthermore, I will thoroughly discuss, reason, and explain each opinion presented by our current society as well as the positions held by previous philosophers. Lastly, I will draw a conclusion to the opinions presented by discussing my personal position on the argument of animal rights.
Test animals are subjected to intense pain and suffering like burn, scrape and infection. A perfectly fine rabbit is shaved and chemicals are rubbed onto its bare skin or eye irritation tests is performed by dripping chemicals into its eyes without any pain relief. Repeated oral force-feeding studies are conducted to look for signs of general illness or health hazards like cancer or birth defects. Sometimes these animals are also forced to swallow massive amounts of chemical to determine the maximum dose that can cause death. The saddest part of this is these tests can take weeks or even months to come up with a result and these poor animals are tortured every day to get to that result. At the end of the test, most of the animals are killed either by neck-breaking or decapitation and in some cases if they can be reused for other experiments, they are abused
Why is it that we as a society condemn the actions of a man against a man but very rarely a man against an animal? I think this question must be understood if we are ever to change the rights animals have. As of yet I don't believe animals have any actual rights. Rather humans have rights that involve animals. If we are to truly allow animals to have rights the same or similar to humans then we must first define what it is that makes us feel as if they are entitled to rights.
backs and they were dragging their hind legs (Reed 38). While in the lab, the
Animal testing causes unimaginable suffering. Many animals used in experiments are force feeding and go through a long physical pain like the infliction of burn and other wounds to study the study the healing process. The cosmetics companies use the Draize eye test, that help evaluate irritation caused by shampoos and other products. Rabbits are more commonly use for this test and their eyelids are held open by clips for many days so they do not blink away the product being
Thesis: (All) Although some may not value animal rights, attention should be directed towards this epidemic as animals’ health and well-being affects us.