Animals Used in Research

The idea of animal rights has been around for centuries. Even decades ago, people were taking action for the welfare of animals. Marc Bekoff and Ned Hettinger share this idea all the way back in 1994 when they said that there is evidence that scientist are concerned with animal welfare by acknowledge that they use the guidelines in place to protect animals during research, in order to have their work published (Bekoff 219). Guidelines are the basis for the moral and ethical treatment of animals. Each person may have his or her own standard, but having a standard among the entire population ensures the welfare of the animals. Unfortunately, these standards are not at a level to where the animals are being protected. Many animals in captivity are treated in ways that would shock the average person. Orcas for example, are starved until they do the desired task (Cowperthwaite). This form of operant condition can lead to success, but often leads to resentment and hostility towards the trainers.

Many researches are finding that many of our fellow creatures are more like us than we had ever imagined. A percentage of people feel that concern should be brought upon how animals are treated. The Animal Legal Defense Fund’s Animal Bill of Rights is a petition to the United States Congress. The petition states the basic rights that all living beings other than humans should have and that our government should protect. It states the right of animals to be free from exploitation, cruelty, neglect, and abuse. The right of laboratory animals not to be used in cruel or unnecessary experiments. The right of animals to be in a healthy diet, protective shelter and sufficient medical care.The right of wildlife to a natural habitat, ecologically good enough to a normal existence and self-sustaining population.The right of farmed animals to an environment that fulfill their basic physical and psychological needs. The right of animals to have their interest represented in court and safeguarded by the law of the land. These are the six important keys in the act. No one can predict what actually happens to animals behind doors or even in nature, but it is fairly easy to say that not all animals are

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

“Nearly as many, 68 percent, were concerned or very concerned about the well-being of animals used in ‘sports’ or contests as well as animals in laboratories (67 percent) (Kretzer, 1).” Many people question whether an animal is capable of thought and emotions. Others feel as though animals are the equivalent of humans and should be treated as such. Since the 1800’s, animal rights has been a topic that has several different sides including two extremes. If animals can react to their environment, emote, and are aware of things done to or with them, then they should have similar rights to humans.

People often use animals for a lot of experiments even though most people think that is it wrong. People make up countless excuses to why it’s okay to do this. But it is not okay. Animal researchers and such agree with my opinion that using animals for tests that we as humans would never want to do, is bad and very hypocritical, yet unfortunately there are just as many scientists who say that it is completely fine and that there isn’t really much harm brought to the animals. Mind you, these scientists have apparently never owned a beloved pet close to their heart. The two essays, "Animal Rights, Human Wrongs" by Tom Regan and "Proud to be Speciesist" by Stephen Rose, talk about the issue of animal rights, but are written on completely opposing

In this essay I will cover the philosophy of Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. I will begin by covering Kant perspective of rational beings and his idea of a priori learning. I will then move on to his idea of categorical imparaitive. After Kant I will discuss Mill’s utilitarian theory regarding pleasure and pain. With a better understanding of those I will move to Mill’s idea of a posteriori and hypothetical imperative. Following the ideas of these philosophers I will attempt to depict their viewpoints of the issue of animal cruelty through experimentation. To conclude the essay I will state my stance and who’s side, if either, I take in the animal cruelty controversy.

For many years there has been an ongoing debate on whether or not animals should be given rights, even there own bill of rights. Some who are against the animal bill of rights argue that testing products on animals is important to the safety of humans. Others who want the new bill of rights claim that animals have feelings and that science is treating them inhumanely. Animal activists also add that animals are intelligent beings and are aware of how they are treated. Based on science proving animal activists correct on many of their points, this calls for a new bill of rights, in the United States, especially written for the protection and care of wild and domestic animals.

On the other hand, I believe Carl Cohen has better arguments for animal research use. He agrees that animals are aware of feeling pain, and suffering, but he disagrees that although animals are sharing these traits with humans does not mean that they are morally equal to humans. Cohen thinks people are mistaking animal’s rights because they are confused between rights and obligations; so they guess that due to the accountability to animals that humans have, they believe that animals do have rights. This false prediction is based on false logic. Cohen explains the differences between obligation and right, one as something we ought to do and the other as what others properly order that we do. Cohen states that the moral agents on this planet

Using lab animals is needed to determine the toxicity of chemicals but there are pros and cons. Lab animals are used to save human lives. Animals are used because they are similar in ways to humans. Animals lives are saved by testing. Testing on animals helps with the safety of products. The life of an animal is considered less than a human. Some cons of testing animals are that some animals be mistreated. Not all animals are similar to humans. Testing some animals may lead to false readings which threaten humans. Some alternatives have been created to take the place of animal testing but we still use animals. Testing animals are not well

I will argue that Utilitarianism is a reasonable ethical theory to demonstrate we have a duty to accord moral consideration to sentient beings equally, in this case non-human animals. I will illustrate under Utilitarian criteria, that non-human animals are indeed sentient and that it is enough to count for moral standing. I will defend my argument in examples of practices commonly used in treating animals a resource, such as for food and in laboratory experiments. This will prove that any action that fails to treat animals as a being with moral standing violates an animal’s right, and therefore is morally impermissible.

Currently it is estimated that more than 100 million animals are used for research and experimentation on around the world every year. Apart from all the benefits of animal testing there are many good reasons which support banning the experimentations on animals such as: animal cruelty, selfishness, and danger of using the experiments result. Therefore animal experimentation should be banned.

In our world, protests occur each day on the issues of animal cruelty and human rights, but when the issues are put together which will reign over the other? The author Peter Singer of “All Animals are Equal” and “Tools for Research” presents his argument for determining when animal experiments are justified. The author starts his paper with a counter argument, questioning if one would be willing to let thousands of people die if those people could be saved by experimentation on a single animal. The answer is a unanimous no; in our culture we value human life over everything else. The author follows by asking the reader if they would be prepared to carry out their experiments on humans who are mentally retarded or orphaned babies, if that

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”.

Animal research plays an important role in the understanding of diseases by scientists as well as in the development of medical treatment that are effective. Animals normally provide scientists with models, which have complex living systems that consist of organs, cells and tissues (Fisher, 2014). These animal models not only interact with stimuli but they also react to it thereby giving researchers a picture of how a compound is moving through the living system as well as an idea of how that stimuli can react in the human body. Most animals’ researches are purposely used on the treatment and prevention of diseases. In addition, they are also used in the treatment of injuries. Mice and rats are the animals that are mostly used and they

In medical research animals are used as ‘models’ for human disease by artificially inducing selected symptoms intended to resemble human illnesses. (vier-pfoten.org) However, a disease is more than simply a collection of symptoms, and so the human disease itself and its underlying biology can never be fully replicated in an animal model. The use of scientific research on animals can be cruel and inhumane to the well-being of animals. All the research and animals they get are very expensive to pay. And very time consuming. The use of doing tests for illnesses on animals is a waste of time, and isn’t needed.