Introduction
Using animals in scientific research has been an ongoing debate for decades. The idea is that exposing animals to a drug will indicate whether or not the drug could be used safely and effectively in humans. This is far from true. In fact, relying on animal testing to protect and advance medicine is unpredictable, time-consuming, and, most of all, dangerous. I do not believe that the FDA properly regulates animal testing as used in clinical trials and treatments because the guidelines fail to take into proper consideration that humans and animals have major biological differences and the fact that animals are usually healthy in the beginning of an experiment. review of relevant ethical issues, including the choice of ethical theory
A significant aspect to consider when discussing the issue of animal experimentation focuses on people’s views of animals. Mostly everyone would agree that animals are entitled to respect, which is why it is unethical to mistreat pets or aimlessly hurts animals. The question is, how much respect are they owed and what rights, if any, do they have? How much should they be allowed to suffer in research? I believe that humans have a moral responsibility to respect animals. I am not saying that they should be treated the
…show more content…
Sure, scientists have made advancements from animal experimentation. However, the dangers outweigh the benefits, and today there are many alternative methods of testing including using in vitro and human cell culture, computerized models and drug simulations, stem cell and genetic testing, non-invasive imaging technology, and microdosing (“Alternatives to Animal Testing”). I think that the FDA needs to move away from animal testing and begin using these alternative methods in order to safely and efficiently advance