Persuasive Essay Against Animal Testing

Picture walking into a back room of a lab for a major makeup company like MAC and seeing hundreds of animals in cages. These animals consist of a variety of rabbits, rats, mice, hamsters, birds, and even farm animals. Some animals are physically hurt for the rest of their lives and others have completely been taken over for testing and only have a few days left. Innocent lives of animals taken in hopes of possibly finding another way to benefit humans. How is this fair, and how are major companies allowed to do whatever they want to these animals? This is the story for many major pharmaceutical and cosmetic companies in the industry. First, It is morally wrong to kill an innocent animal that hasn’t done anything to deserve the torture and ultimately

Furthermore, scientists have found many ways to test products without using animals. These methods are more accurate because they are a closer representation to humans. These ways of testing are effective by using human cells and studying the way the substances affect the human cells that are in some kind of glass/container. An article from animal-testing.procon.org states “Alternative testing methods now exist that can replace the need for animals. In vitro (in glass) testing, such as studying cell cultures in a petri dish, can produce more relevant results than animal testing because human cells can be used”. This piece of text from the article tells us that there are more reliable ways of testing these products other than on animals. This alternate testing is done by using human cells and examining how they react with the product under a microscope. An additional reliable way of testing products is using a technique called microdosing. Another piece of text from the same article states, “Microdosing, the administering of doses too small to cause adverse reactions, can be used in human volunteers, whose blood is then analyzed.” This piece of evidence informs the reader that, human donors can volunteer to take small amounts of the product and see how it affects them. This is clearly very reliable because it uses humans who are almost exactly like the consumers of the product that is being tested. To conclude using human cells instead of animals is a much smarter and more reliable way of