Arguments Against Animal Testing

429 Words2 Pages

There is a huge uproar about whether or not animals should be tested for scientific or commercial testing. Some people think that if it’s helpful to us then we should test them, while others think that it’s completely wrong to test animals. Although they use the animals to test medications are essential to our living, we should not be hurting animals just to see if these things work. There are multiple disadvantages that testing animals have. They include: Animals being tested for medications are really different than people being tested for these meds, and most human illnesses are never seen in animals.
One reason animal testing is cruel, is that these animals being tested for medications are really different than people being tested for meds. http://animal-testing.procon.org/, states that “Animal tests on the arthritis drug Vioxx showed that it had a protective effect on the hearts of mice, yet the drug went on to cause more than 27,000 heart attacks and sudden cardiac deaths before being pulled from the market.” This shows us that this arthritis drug is not telling us the right thing. When animals are being tested on these animals, you see the drug work on animals. Yet, when Humans take this drug they don’t see any positive effect. In fact, they …show more content…

http://www.peta2.com/boards/topic/33-reasons-why-animal-testing-is-pointless/ says that, “ Less than 2% of human illnesses (1.16%) are ever seen in animals. Over 98% never affect animals.” This also tells us that most illnesses that occur in these animals are never seen in humans. Using animals to judge some illnesses that humans have can tell scientist most of these never affect animals. So if you’re using an animal that never gets effected to help them decide if the medication works or not will give you a horrible outcome. If you end up using those medications how many more people’s lives are you putting on the