Arguments Against Animal Testing

Each year there have been 100 million animals killed because of the laboratories for medical research. Animal testing is used to benefit humans to find a solution for diseases and tested on animals to make sure it is compatible for humans. If there was a disease to contract a human, this is where scientist use these animals to replace humans to be the first one to test out the new drug. However, animal testing has not been reliable to humans and the conditions, the burning, overcrowding, and death, are what these animals go through during medical research. Animal testing needs to be stopped because of the unethical reason to put an animal through pointless pain when there are other options to avoid animal test. For example, human tissue and

Animals are more than a testing puppet, but have a place in our society (Garner). The waste of animal’s lives going down the drain, but they will not stop these actions because of the mentality that it saves lives. However, it has been shown that animal testing does not always benefit the human race. Berlatsky himself writes, “If experimenting on one intellectually-disabled person could benefit 1,000 children, would we, do it? Of course not! Ethics dictate that the value of each life in and of itself cannot be superseded by its potential value to anyone else”. The essence of Berlatsky argument is that if it was a human put into the position they would defend it like nothing, but if it were an animal and they were presented with the truth it does not always benefit us; there would still not be a change in the way they saw animal testing. Our mentality needs to be changed to notice that these animals deserve a chance to live and not taken advantage of. What supporters do is that by not showing sympathy to animals it creates the dependency on animal testing when it creates danger to