Humane Treatment of Animals

Humane Treatment of Animals

Animal testing is a necessity in today's society. This topic receives a lot of attention worldwide. There are many people who feel that risking an animals well being is cruel and inhumane. They may be right; however, I'm taking a utilitarian approach on this topic and saying that the greater good for majority of people wins. At this day in age we cannot simply stop testing animals until another way is discovered.

The application of animals to test a large number of products from household chemicals and cosmetics to Pharmaceutical products has been considered to be a normal strategy for many years. Laboratory animals are generally used in three primary fields: biomedical research, product security evaluation and education (PETA). "It has been estimated that approximately, 20 million animals are being used for testing and are killed annually; about 15 million of them are used to test for medication and five million for other products. Reports have been generated to indicate that about 10 percent of these animals are not being administered with painkillers"(PETA). The supporters of animal rights are pressurizing government agencies to inflict severe regulations on animal research. However, such emerging criticisms of painful experimentation on animals are coupled with an increasing concern over the cost it would have on scientific progress.

Around the world, animals are utilized to test products ranging from shampoo to new cancer drugs. Each and every medication used by humans is first tested on the animals. Animals were also applied to develop anesthetics to ease human ailments and suffering during surgery. Currently, questions have been raised about the ethics surround animal testing. As a result several regulations have been put in place to evaluate and control the animals being used for testing purposes. These regulations hope to ensure that such research is carried out in a humanely and ethical manner (AMPEF).

The supporters of animal testing argue that if testing is eliminated, many of the medications and procedures that we currently use today wouldn't exist and the development of future treatments would be extremely limited. They argue that humans have been assisted from the healthcare developments that have been based on the benefits of animal research and testing for many years now. Supporters argue that research is justified because it assists in discovering ways to help people and other animals for the future.

"Surgery on animals has assisted in developing organ transplant and open-heart surgery techniques." Animal testing has also assisted in developing vaccines against diseases like rabies, polio, measles, mumps, rubella and TB. Development of antibiotics, HIV drugs, insulin and cancer treatments depend upon animal tests. They argue that other testing techniques are not advanced enough. "The most radical progress in reproductive medicine such as oral contraceptives, in vitro fertilization, hormone replacement therapy, etc., have all been made possible by animal research (AMPEF)."

Medical procedures like measuring blood pressure, pacemakers and heart and lung machines were used on animals prior to being tried on humans. Surgery techniques, like those to mend and eliminate bone diseases were devised out of experimentation on the animals. Animal testing not only benefits humans but also helps other animals, for example the heartworm medication that was devised from research on animals has assisted many dogs. The cat nutrition has been better comprehended through such research and has assisted cats to live longer and healthier lives (Cohen).

Animal models for AIDS are very important factors that are required to understand the biology of immuno-deficiency viruses. This allows us to raise necessary awareness about the processes of pathogenesis and its prevention by vaccination and chemotherapy (No Lie Can Live Forever). Those who support testing argue that the society has an obligation to take actions in ways that will minimize injury and maximize benefits. This is a utilitarian view on animal testing. You have to give a little to get a lot, as long as it's not the humans facing inhumane treatment. Banning or restraining the experimentation on animals would be detrimental to society. It is assumed that a scientist's goal is to devise methods to minimize pain to every extent possible but for now we have to sacrifice on animals to achieve this result. Activists against this practice portray scientists to be a society of crazy, cruel, curiosity seekers. However, when one feeds painkillers to their children they want to know if they are safe. Without animal testing lives many people's lives would be risked attaining such advancements.

Those who support this procedure argue that the advantages that animal testing has brought to humans is considered a lot greater in comparison to the costs in terms of the sufferings inflicted on comparatively less number of animals. They argue that society is required to maximize the opportunities to generate such valuable consequences even at the cost of inflicting