Animal Testing Should Be Banned Essay
537 Words3 Pages
Did you know that the shampoo you use was probably forced down the throat of a rabbit, cat, or maybe even a dog? Each year, millions of animals are used to test how safe and effective products, such as cosmetics, are. They are genetically modified, force-fed harmful chemicals, blinded, scalded, and maimed. How could one not object to this awful cruelty? Animal testing should be banned because it is cruel, unnecessary, inaccurate, and expensive. The very first reason why animal testing should be banned is elementary: it is cruel and unnecessary. Approximately 17-22 million animals are used for testing each year in the United States. Substances are injected into the animal, chemicals are force-fed, irritants are rubbed into the eyes and…show more content…
This should be reason enough to end the madness of animal tests. Specific evidence points that animal testing should not be allowed; however the debate is also on moral grounds. Several people, about 60% of the population, agree that animal testing should be banned because it is just wrong. To be born into the world on a concrete floor and be made to lead a life with no freedom is worse than having no life. They have no chance to stop the pain or torment, simply because they are “just animals.” Animal activists and everyday people believe that humans are voices for the animals. Therefore, animal testing is considered ethically wrong and people should act as the advocate for the animals. Although large companies and those for animal testing might think that animal testing is essential for products to be declared safe for human use, that is entirely untrue. Animals are not humans, so testing is not accurate. They are also genetically modified and subjected to abnormal stress. According to the FDA, only 5-25% of animal tests and human tests agree, so there is little relevance to humans. Furthermore, only 9% of products tested on animals make it to market. This questions how safe the products really are. What is effective in animals isn’t effective for humans. For example, drugs such as Vioxx, Phenactin, and E-Ferol were not effective in 92% of humans. That is
1. Badyal DK, Bala S, Kathuria P. Student evaluation of teaching and assessment methods in pharmacology. Indian J Pharmacol. 2010;42:86–8.[PMC free article][PubMed]
2. Babu CS, Latha K, Thirunavukkarasu J, Tharani CB. Virtual experimental pharmacology an alternative or not? A global assessment by pharmacology faculties and MBBS students? Rec Res Sci Tech. 2011;3:25–9.
3. Badyal DK, Modgill V, Kaur J. Computer simulation models are implementable as replacements for animal experiments. Altern Lab Anim. 2009;37:191–5.[PubMed]
4. Dewhurst DG, Kojic ZZ. Replacing animal use in physiology and pharmacology teaching in selected universities in eastern Europe-charting a way forward. Altern Lab Anim. 2011;39:15–22.[PubMed]
5. Committee for the purpose of control and supervision of experiments on animals (CPCSEA) [Last accessed on 2013 May 25]. Available from: http://moef.nic.in/modules/divisions/cpcsea .
6. University Grants Commission; 2011. [Last accessed on 2013 May 25]. Guidelines for discontinuation of dissection and animal experimentation in zoology/life sciences in a phased manner. Available from: http://www.gujaratuniversity.org.in/web/NWD/NewsEvents/8999_UGC%20Guidelines%20for%20Animal%20Dissection%20and%20Experimentation.pdf .
7. Medical council of India, New Delhi, amendment notification of 8 July 2009 to the Minimal standard requirements for medical colleges with 150 admissions annually, regulations. 1999. [Last accessed on 2013 May 25]. Available from: http://www.mciindia.org/helpdesk/how_to_start/STANDARD%20FOR%20150.pdf .
8. Bertoloni MD. Early modern experimentation on live animals. J Hist Biol. 2013;46:199–226.[PubMed]
9. Animal testing. Wikipedia. [Last accessed on 2013 May 25]. Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_testing .
10. Nuffield council of bioethics. [Last accessed on 2013 May 25]. Available from: http://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/animal-research/animal-research-what-animals-are-used-research .
11. Annual report animal usage by fiscal year, United States department of agriculture, animal and plant inspection service. 2011. [Last accessed on 2013 May 25]. Available from: http://speakingofresearch.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/2010_animals_used_in_research.pdf .
12. Statistics of scientific procedures on living animals. Home office, Great Britain. 2012. [Last accessed on 2013 May 25]. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/115853/spanimals11.pdf .
13. Liebsch M, Grune B, Seiler A, Butzke D, Oelgeschla¨ger M, Pirow R, et al. Alternatives to animal testing: current status and future perspectives. Arch Toxicol. 2011;85:841–58.[PMC free article][PubMed]
14. IUCN the red list of threatened species. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://www.iucnredlist.org/search .
15. The recommendations of the sub-committee on rehabilitation of animals after experimentation set up by CPCSEA. 2006. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://envfor.nic.in/divisions/awd/Rehabiliaion_Guidelines.pdf .
16. Mohammad AA, Mohammed Z, Karukayil JM. Alternatives to animals in education, research and risk assessment: An overview with special reference to Indian context. ALTEX. 2013;2:5–19.
17. Dewhurst D, Hemmi A. A survey of animal use and alternatives in higher education in Europe. University of Edinburgh, UK. ALTEX. 2012;1:1–14.
18. Animals in scientific procedures, UK Parliament/Chapter 1: Introduction. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200102/ldselect/ldanimal/150/15004.htm .
19. All noble prizes in physiology or medicine. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates .
20. Balcombe J. 1st ed. Washington: Humane Society Press; 2000. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. The use of animals in higher education: Problems, alternatives and recommendations. Available from: http://www.humanesociety.org/assets/pdfs/parents_educators/the_use_of_animals_in_higher_ed.pdf .
21. Regulations on graduate medical education, 1997 (amended upto 2010). Medical Council of India. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://www.mciindia.org/Rules-and-Regulation/GME_REGULATIONS.pdf .
22. Badyal D. 1st ed. New Delhi: Jaypee Publishers; 2008. Practical manual of Pharmacology; pp. 73–93.
23. Postgraduate medical education regulations, 2000 (amended upto 2012). Medical Council of India. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://www.mciindia.org/RulesandRegulations/PGMedicalEducationRegulations2000.aspx .
24. Arora T, Mehta AK, Joshi V, Mehta KD, Rathor N, Mediratta PK, et al. Substitute of animals in drug research: an approach towards fulfillment of 4R's. Indian J Pharm Sci. 2011;73:1–6.[PMC free article][PubMed]
25. Vandebriel RJ, van Loveren H. Non-animal sensitization testing: State-of-the-art. Cri Rev Toxicol. 2010;40:389–404.[PubMed]
26. Pound P, Ebrahim S, Sandercock P, Bracken MB, Roberts I. Where is the evidence that animal research benefits humans? BMJ. 2004;328:514–7.[PMC free article][PubMed]
27. Cosmetics and animal testing: A historic victory. Peta UK. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://www.peta.org.uk/features/new-cosmetics-law/default.asp .
28. More than a cosmetic change. News feature. Nature. 2012;438:144–6.[PubMed]
29. Creton S, Dewhurst IC, Earl LK, Gehen SC, Guest RL, Hotchkiss JA, et al. Acute toxicity testing of chemicals: Opportunities to avoid redundant testing and use alternative approaches. Cri Rev Toxicol. 2010;40:50–83.[PubMed]
30. Wilson-Sanders SE. Models for biomedical research, testing and education. ILAR J. 2011;52:126–52.[PubMed]
31. Animal testing is bad science. Point/counterpoint. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/animal-testing-bad-science.aspx .
32. Mardas D, Mohammad AA, Bas B, Francesca C, Pierre C, Rodger C, et al. A framework program for the teaching of alternative methods (replacement, reduction, refinement) to animal experimentation. Altex. 20;28:341–52.[PubMed]
33. Liu Z, Liu J, Wang F, Xu G, Hou J, Wan X, et al. Improvement of local lymph node assay for cosmetics safety evaluation [Article in Chinese] Wei Sheng Yan Jiu. 2009;38:585–9.[PubMed]
34. Richmond J. Refinement, reduction, and replacement of animal use for regulatory testing: future improvements and implementation within the regulatory framework. ILAR J. 2002;43:S63–8.[PubMed]
35. Kurosawa TM. Alternatives to animal experimentation v.s. animal school [Article in Chinese] Yakugaku Zasshi. 2008;128:741–6.[PubMed]
36. Report on Enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act. U.S. Department of Agriculture. [Last accessed 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_welfare/downloads/awreports/awreport2005.pdf. 2005 Report on Enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act” (PDF)
37. Smith JA, Jennings M. Categorising the severity of scientific procedures on animals. The Boyd Group and the RSPCA, July 2004 RSPCA. Research Animals Department
38. People for the ethical treatment of animals. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_for_the_Ethical_Treatment_of_Animals .
39. BBC news; [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Two drug trial men critically ill. Available from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/4808836.stm .
40. Animal rights [Wikipedia] [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_rights Animal rights .
41. A chronology of animal protection laws. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://www.animalsandethics.org/chronology.html .
42. The prevention of cruelty to animals act, as amended by Central Act 26 of 1982. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://www.moef.nic.in/legis/awbi/awbi01.html .
43. Ministry of social justice and empowerment notification, New Delhi, 1998. The Breeding of and Experiments on Animals (Control and Supervision) Rules. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://envfor.nic.in/legis/awbi/awbi10.pdf .
44. Guidelines for care and use of animals in scientific research. Indian National science academy. First edition, revised edition. 1992, 2000. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://icmr.nic.in/bioethics/INSA_Guidelines.pdf .
45. Guidelines for use of laboratory animals in medical colleges. Indian council of medical research, New Delhi. 2001. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://icmr.nic.in/bioethics/Guidelines_medicalcollege.pdf .
46. Vision 2015, Medical Council of India. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://www.mciindia.org/tools/announcement/MCI_booklet.pdf .
47. Guhad F. Introduction to the 3 Rs (refinement, reduction and replacement) Contemp Top Lab Anim Sci. 2005;4:58–9.[PubMed]
48. Validation, regulatory acceptance and international harmonization. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://alttox.org/ttrc/validation-ra .
49. Balls M, Amcoff P, Bremer S, Casati S, Coecke S, Clothier R, et al. The principles of weight of evidence validation of test methods and test strategies. Altern Lab Anim. 2005;34:603–20.[PMC free article][PubMed]
50. Wind M, Blakey D, Kojima H, Kreysa J, Stokes W. The international cooperation on alternative test methods (ICATM) ALTEX. 2010;27(Spec Issue):207–10.
51. Table of validated and accepted alternative methods (updated 2013) [Last accessed 2013 on May 30]. Available from: http://alttox.org/ttrc/validation-ra/validated-ra-methods.html .
52. Takahashi K, Ishikawa N, Sadamoto Y, Sasamoto H, Ohta S, Shiozawa A, et al. E-Cell 2: Multi-platform E-Cell simulation system. Bioinformatics. 2003;19:1727–9.[PubMed]
53. Ispra, Italy: European centre for the validation of alternative test methods (ECVAM); 2006. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Statement on the scientific validity of the in vitro micronucleus assay as an alternative to the in vitro chromosomal aberration assay for genotoxicity testing. Available from: http://ihcp.jrc.ec.europa.eu/our_labs/eurl-ecvam/scientific-advice-stakeholders-networks/publication/ESAC25_statement_MNT_20061128_C.pdf .
54. Teaching and learning resources, IndPharnet. Network of Indian pharmacologists. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: http://www.indphar.org/xcology.html .
55. CD on X-Cology Pharmacy. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: Http://www.bookshelf.co.in/p/7392/cd-on-x-cology-pharmacy-content-aothors-crpatil-drbodhankar-dr-bhise-nirali-publications .
56. Simulated animal experiments in pharmacology. ExPharm pro. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: Http://www.expharmpro.com .
57. PETA sponsors emantras’ virtual frog dissection software for schools and colleges. 2012. [Last accessed on 2013 May 30]. Available from: Http://www.petaindia.com/features/Educators-Get-Free-Virtual-Dissection-Software.aspx .
58. Stewart AM, Kalueff AV. The Developing utility of zebrafish models for cognitive enhancers. Curr Neuropharmacol. 2012;10:263–71.[PMC free article][PubMed]
59. Mahmood F, Mozere M, Zdebik AA, Stanescu HC, Tobin J, Beales PL, et al. Generation and validation of a zebrafish model of EAST (epilepsy, ataxia, sensorineural deafness and tubulopathy) syndrome. Dis Model Mech. 2013;6:652–60.[PMC free article][PubMed]
60. Segner H, Caroll K, Fenske M, Janssen CR, Maack G, Pascoe D, et al. Identification of endocrine disrupting effects in aquatic vertebrates and in vertebrates: Report from Europen IDEA project. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2003;54:302–14.[PubMed]
61. Dikshit RK. Animal experiments: Confusion, contradiction, and controversy. Indian J Pharmacol. 2012;44:661–2.[PMC free article][PubMed]