Persuasive Position Research Paper

Animal Testing: Purely Inexcusable

         Every single year over one hundred thousand animals are used for experimental testing,

says People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, a nonprofit organization who fights against

testing of animals. Animals are used in the testing of drugs, vaccines, makeup and medical

devices, to determine how safe the product is for human use. Animal testing is not justified for

three main reasons. Those reasons would be that animal testing is very extensive resulting in

highly expensive costs for both the equipment and materials needed, the testing is inhumane and

cruel, and overall no matter if the outcome of the animal tests are safe for human trial or use, the

product results can be ineffective or even dangerous for humans.

         To start, most people do not even realize that animal testing products occurs, immediately

destroying the level of transparency that consumers assume is there between them and

companies. This is without even considering how inhumane and cruel the testing on these

animals actually is. Animal testing is done on many different species of animals and tests can

result in life threatening effects such as the burning, crippling, and even poisoning of animals.

Some of the many species that are used for testing all over the world would include rats, cats,

fish, birds, turtles, pigs, monkeys, and more as the list is almost never ending. There are many

different products and companies who use the cruel method of animal testing to ensure that their

products are "safe" for selling. These experiments can include testing for drugs, chemicals,

medical devices, food and makeup products. When the animals are taken for experimentation,
most times they are locked down and confined in cages within a laboratory setting to eliminate

test differences or errors.

The experimentation tests are thorough and in depth usually resulting in long periods of

testing because there are three phases from start to finish that are required by the Food and Drug

Administration (FDA). These three phases entail phase one: a limited small number of animals

for testing groups, if successful the FDA move is made to start phase two where studies are

increased in numbers. Following successful outcomes of phase two the FDA moves to the last

phase, phase three where studies are then expanded to testing groups of thousands in each to test

overall drug effectiveness and if the drugs result in being effective and safe the FDA then

approves for human trials. For example, according to the Humane Society, registration of a

single pesticide requires more than fifty experiments and the use of as many as twelve thousand

animals (Pugh, 2016). Overall the number of animals put through experiments and trials of

testing that end up crippled or dead makes it inexcusable and therefore another obvious reasons

to why animal testing is unjustified. Not only can the cost of a life never be justified but the

financial price of animal testing is absolutely outrageous further proving my point that animal

testing is not justified.

         Animal testing is more expensive than many Americans think. Not only that but many do

not realize that their tax dollars are part of the astronomical budget. In fact, just in the United

States alone, over sixteen billion dollars a year in taxpayer money is spent on animal testing

expenses (PETA, 2011). The crazy part is that the cost of sixteen billion dollars a year is not

even the United States government’s full budget for animal testing. The government is said to
spend an average budget of between fifteen and twenty billion dollars a year (Bastasch, 2013).

This has many people asking why is the cost so high. Well this would be because even though

the process is often covered up by the government and companies in order to keep their brand

loyal customers; it happens all over the world every day. Many people see animal testing as a

necessity for the safety of the general public and therefore will look over the costs of the process.

However, this is not true as there are other methods. For example, instead of animal testing there

should be a switch to in vitro testing. There are other methods for example instead of animal

testing there should be a switch to in vitro testing.

In vitro testing is the use of human cells, most of the time skin cells depending on what is

being tested and these tests are performed in either a petri dish or test tube in a laboratory in

order to deem a safe product. The reason that there should be a change from animal testing to in

vitro testing is not only is it not inhumane or cruel to any life form, but it is substantially cheaper.

The cost difference is massive, where animal testing falls in the cost range of billions of dollars

total, in vitro testing lands only in the thousands. Specifically, for example according to Humane

Society International, cancer medication testing on animal tests cost over seven hundred

thousand dollars whereas in vitro cost a mere twenty thousand. This shows that there are other

methods that reduce costs in a major way with the same end game results. Not only would it save

the cost of life, but it would also save the tax dollars. This could give the government the

opportunity to put good use to the saved money such as allocating it for productive areas like

national security or health care making the United States safer for everyone. The expensive costs

in addition to the unnecessary inhumane cruel treatment of animal testing, what if I told you that

most times the treatments are ineffective in humans?

  Positive animal testing outcomes often move to human trials and end up being ineffective

or even harmful to the sample. Although animal testing experiments are repeated, long, precise,

and checked in order to result in a positive outcome that leads to the human trial testing of a

product, drug, chemical, etc, the anatomical differences between animals and humans can very

often cause a product to be harmful to humans and not the animals. According to Kelly Overton,

just over 90 percent of medical products released to humans turns out to be harmful or straight

out ineffective though it had positive outcomes in the animals during testing (Overton, 2018).

This reiterates my point that the anatomical differences can become a problem when it comes to

individual differences between the animal species and humans during the testing period.

For example, one test that had passed all animal testing requirements and was then

allowed for human trial by the FDA was a drug to treat Parkinson’s disease. This ended up

having no positive or negative effect in humans though in animals it treated and cured the disease

(Parkinson’s Disease Foundation, n.d.). Though some of these drugs, chemicals, and vaccines are

given the green light from the FDA for human use and ends up not having an effect on humans,

or there are some that can be dangerous or have negative effects on humans. This has happened

with many different products that have been released for humans by the FDA after passing the

animal testing stages. An example of this was back in May of 2004 when an anti-inflammatory

drug was released for human use and actually caused over 140 thousand people to suffer from

heart attacks before it was recalled (Bhattacharya, 2005). The amount of times this outcome has

occurred from products passed by the FDA after animal testing shows positive outcomes yet still

resulting in ineffectiveness or dangerous effects on humans in the end is astounding.

 Although most people are against animal testing there are some who support it, as they

feel strongly that animal testing is justified due to the fact there are some positive points. These

people support animal testing because of the effective medical drug and vaccines that have been

developed through methods of research and testing on animals. There have been many

substantial drugs and vaccines developed over the years all of which have had major benefits to

the human people. For example, according to The Foundation for Biomedical Research, some of

the many drugs and vaccines developed would include the vaccines that ended the smallpox

epidemic as well as the polio outbreak and drugs that have been used to combat cancer, malaria,

HIV, hepatitis, Alzheimer’s, and many others. Even though I understand the point of view of

those who support animal testing, the costs of both the animal lives and financial resources

required for testing experiments far outweigh the advantages. Not only this but there is evidence

that other methods of testing can be used which have a significantly smaller price tag and no

lives on the line.

To conclude, animal testing is in no way shape or form justified. This is because testing is

inhumane, very extensive, and overall no matter the outcome of the animal tests the product

results can be ineffective or even dangerous for humans. Animal testing needs to be stopped, and

this can be done in a few effective methods. Three of the simplest options would include:

boycotting the use of animal tested products, signing petitions against animal testing, and even

just simply educating others about the downfalls of animal testing so they can support the

movement as well. There are two words, cruelty and cure, very similar but animal testing is a

form of cruelty that is not necessary to develop cures and safety of products for human use.

 
 References:

Bastasch, M. (2013, October 6). Feds spend up to $14.5 billion annually on animal testing.

Retrieved from https://dailycaller.com/2013/10/05/feds-spend-up-to-14-5-billion-annually-on-

animal-testing/

Bhattacharya, S. (2005, January 25). Up to 140,000 heart attacks linked to Vioxx. Retrieved from

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6918-up-to-140000-heart-attacks-linked-to-vioxx/?

ignored=irrelevant#.VTDOWZN9zfY

Foundation for Biomedical Research. (n.d.). Animal Research Achievements. Retrieved from

https://fbresearch.org/medical-advances/animal-research-achievements/

Human Society International. (2019, April 2). Costs of Animal and Non-Animal Testing.

Retrieved from https://www.hsi.org/news-media/time_and_cost/

NAVS. (n.d.). Animal Testing. Retrieved from https://www.navs.org/what-we-do/keep-you-

informed/science-corner/areas-of-science-that-use-animals/animals-in testing/?

gclid=EAIaIQobChMI9dm50PGD6AIVCxgMCh0lZATZEAAYASAAEgJmZvD_BwE#.Xm

E7LpNKg_U

Overton, K. (2018, October 27). Stop animal testing - it's not just cruel, it's ineffective. Retrieved

from https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-2006-06-23-0606230051-story.html
PETA. (2011, August 3). It's Tax Season: Learn How More Than $12 Billion in Taxpayer Money

Is Wasted Annually. Retrieved from https://www.peta.org/features/taxpayer-money-wasted-

annually-animal-testing

Pugh, C. (2016). Animal Testing is Animal Cruelty. Retrieved from

https://www.oneworldeducation.org/animal-testing-animal-cruelty