Arguments Against Animal Testing

Pro animal testers claim that their research is highly regulated, with laws in place to protect animals from mistreatment. (Source 4) This statement is true but misleading at most. There are three main legislative documents and regulations for animal testing: The AWA, the “Three R’s” and The Guide, each of which must be followed in order to have a legal research facility. (Source4) However, the fact that animal testing is regulated does not imply that it is a safe or beneficial process. Actually, each of these documents has its flaws and allows for unjustified animal exploitation. The AWA (Animal Welfare Act) regulates animal testing in the USA, and defines “animal” as any nonhuman primate mammal (monkey, hamster, rabbit, etc.), but excludes

The “Three R’s”, introduced in The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique by zoologist William Russell, are focused on using animals in research humanely, and stand for Replacement (using alternate methods if possible), Reduction (minimizing the amount of testing), and Refinement (reducing suffering and improving animals' living conditions). They are the basis of many animal welfare laws, and have even been incorporated in the AWA. (Source$) Here lies the second problem: these principles are not entirely international, which means that one could look for a place where they do not apply, and freely do any experimentation whatsoever. The same flaw applies to The Guide, which claims that “the avoidance or minimization of discomfort, distress, and pain when consistent with sound scientific practices, is imperative.” (Spurce4) As a matter of fact, the regulations for testing are varied all around the world and one can definitely find a location or situation in which none of these laws apply. For example, in Europe, India and Israel animal-tested products are banned, while the tests are required before selling any product in China. The use of testing for cosmetic products has been prohibited by law (and also enforced) in different places of the world, which is why it is very difficult to find a common

However, it is sad to know that animal testing is only practiced for economic reasons, and this is why it is frequently encountered today. It fails every day, but researches still bet on it to get the millions of dollars of compensation: “Animal experiments continue only because they are profitable.” (Source 2) Our own taxes are ending up in a facility where animals are denied their natural rights, as explained by Swingle: “They have spent 20 years and nearly seven million taxpayer dollars to take baby monkeys away from their mothers. That's right, they think that by depriving infant monkeys of their mothers they will somehow find a cure for AIDS. How ludicrous. […] But to think that by studying maternal deprivation in monkeys one can find the cure for AIDS is like thinking that by studying the wheel you can propel man to the moon.” It is bitter to understand the true nature of animal testers: they are businessmen before scientists, what they actually want is to get the money, not the cure for the disease. They are not in for the greater good of our health, they put money above all and cloak their actions with apparent fruitful results. “Whom would you rather believe? The medical historians, former animal experimenters, human researchers, scientists, physicians and veterinarians who have stated that animal research is futile or the people and big