Carpenter 1

Sadie Carpenter

Prof. Monroe

English 1101

2 December 2021

Should Animals be Used in Experimentation?

For many years animals have been used during experiments in research labs. The

research that scientists have collected from using these animals in these experiments is

remarkable. Using animals has been proven to be very beneficial for the lives of humans and will

continue to do so. As time goes on and there are new illnesses or diseases that need a cure,

testing on animals is the best option as alternative testing is not as reliable as animal testing.

Alternative testing is unnecessary. Erik Stokstad, the managing editor of ScienceNOW

has written an article on why this is. There are alternate ways to test on animals while still

receiving accurate information. Scientists used to test toxic chemicals on mice and kill one to

two mice every two hours, but now with new sensors and monitors, we are able to transmit data

differently (Stokstad). Now scientists are able to receive accurate information while testing on

animals but in a more humane way. This humane way of testing leaves the animals now under

less stress and there are now fewer animals killed (Stokstad). Animal testing is very necessary

and can be very safe if done correctly.

Animals have a similar makeup in comparison to humans. With this being said, scientists

test first on animals to see if the medication would work for a human instead of attempting to use

a computer and get inaccurate results. The purpose of a vaccine is to fight off viruses, testing in

cells or using a computer cannot show how the vaccine would actually work on the entire animal

(Corey). In order to test a vaccine, it is essential that we use animals. Without animals scientists
 Carpenter 2

would not be as confident when sending a computer generated vaccine off to clinical trials.

Animal testing is also very important when testing drugs for young children and infants as they

are constantly growing (Corey). The younger the child, the more likely they are to be harmed by

a certain drug. By testing in animals, scientists are able to test certain drugs to assure that a child

would be unharmed.

Without animals in medical research we are risking the health of humans. Millions of

humans would die without the help of animals in medical research (Epstein). Humans would be

putting others in danger just to save animals. Since animals are being tested on to help humans

then that would follow the requirements of human survival. According to the requirements of

human survival and progress, we need to kill animals for food or when they endanger us, as well

as use them in medical research and experiments for the good of humans (Epstein). Using

animals in medical research is very necessary when someone is in need of a medical cure or at

least a reasonable answer to their illness. Without animals, we would not have gotten this far in

medical research.

Technology is not a good replacement for animal testing. How certain diseases become

resistant to treatments is unable to be simulated by computers or be found in test tubes (Poste).

How or why a certain thing reacts to a certain drug could not be solved unless animal

experimentation is allowed. A life without animal testing would include little to no medication

for those who need it. Alternate testing is more time consuming and costly (Poste). As people try

to find alternatives to animal testing they are also looking for a way to spend more money and

waste time attempting to create reliable vaccines or medications. Finding alternatives is

unnecessary as a majority of them have already been tested and proven unreliable.
 Carpenter 3

Many people oppose using animals in medical research. Marc Bekoff, a former professor

of ecology and evolutionary biology has written an article on this topic, mainly testing on

chimpanzees. Many countries around the world have banned the use of chimpanzees in their

research and the U.S. could do the same (Bekoff). Other countries have realized the harm done to

these animals and have made a stand to do something about it. The long term effects on animals

that are used in research is sickening. The type of effects include inappropriate aggression, fear,

withdrawal and PTSD (Bekoff). The behaviors of these animals are severe and are able to be

compared with human psychiatric disorders.

Animals might experience severe disorders while being used in testing. However, this can

be fixed. Using animals in medical research is still excruciatingly important. There are ways to

decrease the severeness of the disorders that they might experience. Scientists can use less

stressful sensors for the animals and produce more accurate data (Stokstad). The medication that

we can test on whole animals such as rats, mice, etc. are important medications that will help the

lives of humans that might be suffering. In fact, surveys show that most Americans support the

need for animals to be used in medical research (Poste). Realizing how important animal

research is a huge step forward.

In conclusion, animal experimentation for medical research is completely necessary. The

types of research that has been collected after testing certain medicines or vaccines on animals is

quite interesting. With new technology and safer ways to test on animals we have been able to

receive better results and this is a huge step forward for scientists of the future.
 Carpenter 4

Works Cited

Bekoff, Marc. "Use of Chimpanzees in Scientific Research Should Be Banned."

Animal Experimentation, edited by Susan C. Hunnicutt, Greenhaven Press, 2013. At

Issue. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints,

link.gale.com/apps/doc/EJ3010002251/OVIC?u=dayt30401&sid=bookmark-OVIC&xid=

35e11f8c. Accessed 5 Nov. 2021. Originally published as "Is Chimpanzee Research

Necessary? No, Say Many Scientists," Psychology Today, 25 Feb. 2012.

Corey, Lawrence. "Animal Testing Is Essential for Medical Research."

Animal Experimentation, edited by Cindy Mur, Greenhaven Press, 2004. At Issue. Gale

In Context: Opposing Viewpoints,

link.gale.com/apps/doc/EJ3010002220/OVIC?u=dayt30401&sid=bookmark-OVIC&xid=

def26d34. Accessed 5 Nov. 2021. Originally published as "Animals and Research, Part 3:

Alternatives in Medical Breakthroughs," Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 2000.

Epstein, Alex. "Human Well-Being Requires the Use of Animals for Medical Research."

The Rights of Animals, edited by Debra A. Miller, Greenhaven Press, 2009. Current

Controversies. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints,

link.gale.com/apps/doc/EJ3010062276/OVIC?u=dayt30401&sid=bookmark-OVIC&xid=

d9fb7c4e. Accessed 5 Nov. 2021. Originally published as "Animal Rights Movement Is

Cruelty to Humans," San Diego Business Journal, 22 Aug. 2005, pp. 46-47
 Carpenter 5

Poste, George. "Alternative Testing Cannot Replace Animal Experimentation."

Animal Experimentation, edited by Ronnie D. Lankford, Jr., Greenhaven Press, 2009. At

Issue. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints,

link.gale.com/apps/doc/EJ3010002241/OVIC?u=dayt30401&sid=bookmark-OVIC&xid=

a9dcadf9. Accessed 5 Nov. 2021. Originally published as "Animal Testing a Necessary

Research Tool, For Now," Arizona Republic, 3 Sept. 2006

Stokstad, Erik. "Animal Testing Is Becoming More Humane."

Animal Experimentation, edited by Cindy Mur, Greenhaven Press, 2004. At Issue.

Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints,

link.gale.com/apps/doc/EJ3010002223/OVIC?u=dayt30401&sid=bookmark-OVIC&xid

=b142cfb4. Accessed 23 Nov. 2021. Originally published as "Humane Science Finds

Sharper and Kinder Tools," Science, vol. 286, 5 Nov. 1999, pp. 1-068.