Animal Experimentation

Use medicines that were tested on animals, or die? With the discovery of new medicines physicians, based on their research,we can predict the possible outcome or effect the medicine may possibly have. However, success is not guaranteed. Experiments must be done, but on whom? There is only a limited amount of reliable testers that scientist may use to conduct their experiments. Two of the most reliable testers include humans and animals. For many centuries scientists have experimented on animals, and it is still being done in order to maintain a healthier human population (Dixon). New medicines are being discovered throughout the year, and billions of lives are also beings saved thanks to the development of medicines discovered. Animals have helped our society grow and prosper. If it were not for them, the sick would not regain their health. Although many people do not agree with experimentation on animals, we should continue to test on animals in order to find a cure for diseases.
From a baby to an adult, animal testing is used in everyday products (to the Pampers babies wear, to the Johnson and Johnson babies are washed with). In fact, there are an estimated 30 million animals used in experiments for our everyday products (?Update: Animal Testing?). According to Issues & Controversies, ?the American Medical Association (AMA), argue that animal research is crucial to the advancement of science and that it must continue if treatments are to be found for diseases such as cancer and AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome)? (?Animal Testing?). Families are able to depend on each other and know there is an assured percent of survival instead of a minute possibility. Not only are families benefited, but also scientists in the way that they can expand the world of research to find cures due to the ability to conduct experiments on animals. Even the most common sickness would still be killing thousands of individuals today, if it were not for the cures found. The gains in human health and wellbeing outweigh the cost of human suffering. According to Thomas Dixon, the ?reduction of human suffering is our first priority and the prevention of animal suffering or death is secondary to that (although still important)? . Although animal testing is a good investment to our future, many people think of it as cruel and unusual punishment and are determined to put a stop to it.
People like Thomas Dixon argue animals ?have the rights to be treated as beings of value in themselves, not as the means to human ends?. While some despise the idea of testing on animals, others urge animal experimentation to continue if it is the means to greater ends to human suffering. According to Cosmetics International, ?Certain [industries] have announced that they have stopped all animal testing, while others claim to be doing very little? (French say no). Not only are national cosmetic industries putting a stop to animal testing, but many animal right groups are also. Protesters claim that animal testing is a vile way to advance knowledge (?Animal Testing?). They also say that ?humans should treat animals with respect? (Update: Animal Testing). Even though people strongly disagree that animals are needed to be tested for the benefit of mankind, it is unavoidable. Despite the fact that some industries have put a stop to it to test their products, many scientists will still continue to test on animals if the results will create a healthier life for all humans in the near future.
Even though protesters argue that animals are not the only available option for testing, scientists disagree. According to most scientists, there is not a wide variety of substitutions to animal testing (?Update: Animal Testing?). Until there is an alternative to a possible tester, animals are our only option. Many people agree that the use of animals is lamentable but inevitable. There is a vast majority of societies that still continue to eat and wear animal products, including milk, eggs, meat, leather shoes, and belts (?Animal Testing?). Many of these individuals may not consider giving up these everyday products even if it means saving animals? lives, so why should there be a stop to animal testing if there is a possibility to save humans? lives? If treatments are not tested on animals, the only replacement would be to test upon humans (?Animal Testing?). Most people would strongly oppose.