Vivisection: Is it for you?
Animal Research has become a heated debate over the past few decades, reaching a high point around the end of the twentieth century yet it still continues through today. There are two main ways to look at this topic: the logos pro side and the pathos anti side. Those who are for animal testing realize the amazing benefits that can come out of such research while those against animal testing stand up for animals’ rights and try to find ways to better such research without killing so many innocent, defenseless animals. While both sides seem to carry their argument well, those against animal testing ruin their ethos by making their argument an emotional one while those who are for animal testing build
…show more content…
People against animal testing tend to not have the ability to convey themselves unemotionally when it comes to giving logical reasons for discontinuing its use. Many of the people who are against animal testing ask the same question: do animals not have just as much of a right to live as humans do? Their main argument, as seen in David Lewis’ article “Molecular Modeling as an Alternative to Animal Testing,” is that there are many alternative methods to animal testing. Lewis suggests in his article that we use computer simulations to get the information needed. If we have the ability to use alternative methods, why not use them? Computers have come a long way over the years and we should be able to save lives, human or animal, by using them. Such computer simulations can represent a large number of chemicals and compounds and how they would react to a living organism. Overall, those against animal testing use computer programs as a logical way to discontinue animal testing. One of Lewis’ arguments is that animal testing is not always reliable: “However, animal tests themselves have never been validated, and are often erroneously conducted and compiled” (Lewis). He feels that animal testing is unnecessary and sometimes even useless, so alternative methods must be used.
The logos and ethos of the pro animal testing side of the debate are closely related. Since most of the articles that are pro
Traditionally history of the Americas and American population has been taught in a direction heading west from Europe to the California frontier. In Recovering History, Constructing Race, Martha Mencahca locates the origins of the history of the Americas in a floral pattern where migration from Asia, Europe, and Africa both voluntary and forced converge magnetically in Mexico then spreads out again to the north and northeast. By creating this patters she complicates the idea of race, history, and nationality. The term Mexican, which today refers to a specific nationality
Animals very rarely serve as models for the human body. Many people are brought up with the idea that animal experimentation is necessary to insure the safety of humans, but in reality, these experiments are creating only harm to animals. Animals have done nothing to deserve this backlash, and by educating the public on the true unsuccessfulness of animal testing, the ethical side is forced out in the open. The argument ‘Animal Testing is Bad Science’ by the People for The Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), argues that ethics dictate the value of each life, and that no life is overthrown by another. This well formulated argument effectively integrates ethos, logos, powerful structure, and robust premises to persuade the audience.
Studies have shown that gut microbiota is involved in the regulation of many brain functions, such as:
Summary/Description: This book discusses the pros and cons of animal testing. It gives a brief history of the animal right movement, and It also address the legal and ethical issues involved around this cruel testing. The Animal Act was rejected by Congress in the United States and animal testing became a part of scientific and medical life.
Animal testing is an intense shared subject, with an enormous deal of emotion, passion, and thoughts on both sides concerning the ethics of this practice. In attendance there is a grey area as well, as some people support animal testing only under special situations whereas they contest its use for other
Animal testing has been a controversial topic for many generations throughout the world. People against animal testing say that animal testing is cruel and inhumane and
Debates about animal research are often polarized. On one hand, increased knowledge, medical treatments or enhanced animal production are seen to justify any harm. On the other, animals have rights (Fisher, 2014). Ethics, alongside a more informed understanding of the benefits of research and of the aims of animal rights, may in fact produce a more sophisticated common ground between both sides of the debate.
Animal testing is a hotly debated topic among many people. It is the use of animals for research purposes, or to test various new medicines or products. The goal is to see how the animals will react before the products are used for human consumption. The problems arise with the issue of ethics and whether or not the results will actually translate to humans. Those in favor of animal testing will say that animal testing is beneficial, and that the life of a human should be prioritized before other animals. Also, testing on animals will prevent any damage to humans that would arise from human testing. Those against animal testing believe that humans and all other animals should be treated as equals. They also believe that it is inhumane to test
Animal testing has become a controversial issue among many people in the world today. Some of these people involved in this controversial debate believe that animal testing is unethical and should be replaced by other methods. The other group of people in this debate believe that animal testing is necessary in order to research new products that cannot be tested on humans. Traditional animal testing forces animals to undergo numerous experiments for different forms of research. Medical, cosmetic, and many other types of research experiments use animals to provide the results on how the new product may affect humans. There are many people that support the use of alternative methods to animal research and then
When a young girl is looking at a magazine ad for the latest eyeshadow makeup, she notices that the model has on a shade of eyeshadow that looks gorgeous, but did she ever considered how that eyeshadow was manufactured? That makeup product was more than likely tested on animals for eye and skin irritation. Many research labs are using defenseless animals for testing and unnecessary experiments. There are three different types of people that have different thoughts. The one type of person really does not seem to bring the situation to life, and pushes it to the back of their mind, while the other type of person stands for animal testing because it may help save someone's life. Many people believe it is alright for animals to be used for extensive examining and those people think that since animals have similar biological DNA, scientists can use them for testings. Although, there are people who believe that animal testing is not okay, and does not need to exist. People who think that animal testing is bad will say that animal testing can be torture. During the act of animal testing, animals have no say in being tested on. It can be considered animal cruelty. Animals are not treated fairly after being tested on. Animal testing is not always reliable with data. Animals should not be used in medical and/or cosmetic lab testing for several compelling reasons.
In today's world, more than 100 million animals are killed each year in the name of animal testing. Now as some might say that sacrifice is needed for the common good, it is safe to say that animal testing may be taking it over the top to get such test results for the "common good". Animal testing has been a common practice for many years to get results and side effects for food, drugs, pesticides, beauty products, and just about everything one uses in an average day. But now, in the modern world where ethics and animals rights come into the light, the subject of animal testing has become quite a spectacle to be fought over. In an interesting way, the debate over animals questions the humanity of the people of the world, and how far they
This paper addresses animal activists who strongly believe that animal testing is cruel and inhumane act. My audiences are already aware of the situation where tremendous amount of animals are harmed and some even killed from animal testing and experiments. Since they lean towards the side of arguments that disapproves animal testing, my purpose of writing this essay is to at least let my primary audiences to understand and accept the fundamental reasons for conducting animal testing.
Animal testing is a horrible event that occurs worldwide, killing and deforming millions of animals each year. (Pathos/Anger + Amplification) Animal testing is a monstrosity, which is done by monsters. (Aphorism) Testing on animals is unnecessary, cruel and unreliable (Thesis + Understatement). Mice, rats, primates and even cats and dogs are forced to live in cold, dark cages. Having these animals secluded in small cages is like having humans sit in a small room without any contact with the outside world, only allowed to sit there and stare at the wall for hours on end. (Simile) These animals are used to develop treatments, determine toxicity
The issue of animal testing is a widespread and very controversial topic. It entails carrying out torturous and harmful tests and experiments on animals (most commonly mice or rats, but also other animals like rabbits and guinea pigs) for scientific research, whether it be for medical causes, products or cosmetics. In many cases, animal testing is unavoidable – it is impossible to rid the world of something humans rely on so dearly; however, it is imperative that we recognize the moral impacts of our actions and stop relying on it as a major research tactic. It is quite odd that it continues to be commonly used, despite being largely ineffective, the abundance of alternatives available, and the moral issues it brings into light.
Observation and experimentation are how we as humans have been able to learn more about ourselves and the world and universe we live in. One of the most common methods of experimentation is animal testing. However, there are controversies surrounding animal testing. There are some that believe animal testing to be cruel and overdone, advocating for the eradication of the practice and further reliance alternative research methods. Groups like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and other animal rights advocates fall in this category. There are some that believe animal testing to be an invaluable resource and should continue, such as some scientists and research groups. However, there appears to me to be a consensus that is closer to the middle: the belief and understanding that while there are benefits to animal testing, there are flaws in the practice and there should be changes to increase its efficacy while we simultaneously explore alternate testing methods. Many scientists and the National Institute of Health (NIH) subscribe to this idea. I aim to explore the benefits, problems, and implications of animal testing in order to reach a more informed conclusion about a position that is most validated by the information I have used.